So I've heard that they can even clone people now...I dunno

>>18595378
The clone is someone made of the same genetic material, not the same individual, in that sense you'll have to share a soul with your brothers or sisters too and you don't.

>>18595378
>I've heard that they can even clone people now
Where did you hear that?

>>18595378
Cloning is hardly news. If they can clone sheep they can clone humans. It's illegal, but who's to say people don't do it. Obviously, the clone would be a different person from the original. There's no reason to assume they'd have a similar personality.

>>18595400
>If they can clone sheep they can clone humans
Not really. Do you science much?

There is no soul, you are only controlled by a complex neural network that ceases to be when you die

>>18595413
It shows we have the capability to do it, so there's obviously a correlation

Also we can clone humans

Do you science much ?

>>18595430
Cloning a sheep is very different to cloning a human. Aside from ethical and legal barriers, the sheer amount of resources required to clone a human is a significant barrier. You'd know this if you'd actually studied the subject. Saying something "is" doesn't make it true. But then again, perhaps I'm wrong and you can provide a source for your claims?

Spiritually speaking, a clone would be more or less the same as an identical twin. A different soul, but probably with a strong connection (psychic, karmic) to eachother due to their similar traits and origin.

>>18595451
>Alternative truth
Welcome to the decline of western civilization.

File: 1483672513562.png (3MB, 1024x1088px)

3MB, 1024x1088px

>>18595429
said every material reductionist ever

File: cloning1-master1050.jpg (220KB, 1050x700px)

220KB, 1050x700px

>>18595388
Hwang Woo-suk had a paper published and approved by peer review where he claimed to have cloned a human.

This created a controversy, Hwang Woo-suk, went to jail and the peer review system was put into questioning.

Regardless of that, if you are peer reviewer for for biology papers, and someone cames to you with a document that describes a human clonning, you at least read it, and I'm sure that this paper involves a valid method for human clonning.

>>18595544
He claimed to have cloned a human embryo - not a human being - but the claims failed to stand up to independent review. He was subsequently convicted of fraud.

>>18595606
If some mad scientists cloned a human, and this could seriously backfire and put an entire branch of science in jeopardy, I'll accuse him of fraud too.

But the last thing I heard about him, was that he cloned dogs for the russian services.

You don't commision your cloned dogs to a fraud.

File: astralpotato.jpg (203KB, 1903x973px)

203KB, 1903x973px

>>18595429
>>18595471

>>18595610
Dude, the facts are publicly available.

He is a cloning specialist.
He has cloned animals.
His claims of cloning human embryos were refuted.
He was convicted of fraud.

You can't claim conspiracy just because the facts don't support your fantasies. Actually, you can claim there is conspiracy ... just like you can claim not to be a virgin. That doesn't make it true.

Even a clone of you would look less like you than an identical twin plus he would grow up in a completely different world than you did. Unless you have some super strong border line deformation genetic physical characteristic you could meet your own clone and not even suspect much more than liking that kid.

>>18595823
He published a peer reviewed paper on it, that besides all his succesful cloning.

He was convicted for fraud on his Mammoth cloning experiments, because he used black market mammoth meat.

I have never seen someone refute his paper.

>>18595544
It takes forever to work out a new cloning procedure in mammals. And primates are even harder. Humans are about the hardest primates to do anything cloning related to too. It took over a year after working out how to culture primate stem cells to culture human stem cells.

We were cloning frogs in the 50s and had started making clones of mammals in the 80s with Sheep and Cows. Then the first clones made from adult cells in mammals happened in the nineties. The first was Dolly in 96, but think that in 99 the first mice were cloned in the same way. It was only then that they finally worked out how to take embryonic cells in some primates and do what they were doing in sheep and cows in the 90s.

Even then a clone is not going to be exactly the same as yourself for a number of reasons.

>>18595894
I think we have more research on human cells than in any other type of cell beside mice's.

I seriously believe he did it.

>>18595378
Souls can't be cloned apparently. These clones are supposed to have a shelf life before they start doing random weird shit.
Celeb meltdowns etc

>>18595898
>I seriously believe he did it

Do you believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny too? Why not? There's no fucking evidence for them either because the shills are covering it up.

Enjoy your ignorance.

>>18595834
>He published a peer reviewed paper on it
Peer review just means someone who does a similar job to you reads the paper before it's published. They don't do the experiment again. What happened with Woo-suk was when people tried to replicate it nobody could, and he initially claimed it was a case of skill then I think he claimed luck until it became clear he'd been swapping petri dishes around to make it look like he'd made new embryos.

We can now do something similar to what he was claiming and it required the addition of another chemical (caffeine of all things), so really not anything to Woo-suk's research.

I think now he's got friendly with the Raelians.

>>18595906
>>18595907
So...

You are claiming that no one has cloned a human yet?

>>18595898
A lot of people do think that the first human clone is going to be made underground. It's just that no one working in that area that's reputable thinks we have the capability now.

As for humans being more studied or w/e, definitely not. It's hard to study cancer in humans because you can't give humans cancer. P much any other animal you can no problem. Think about how easy it is to get eggs and embryos from a cow or sheep or cat or dog, go to an abbatoir or a vets and you're gtg. They have ovaries coming out the backside. V hard to do that in most of the west.

File: tmp_5611-Agouti_Mice1092461730.jpg (601KB, 1200x941px)

601KB, 1200x941px

>>18595913
Mouse on the left is a clone of the mouse on the right. It'd be easy to spot because they'd be fat as fuck and tall as fuck.

Inb4 the US is halfway to starting the clonewars because obesity epidemic.

>>18595913
>Now he gets it.
You got any proof someone has?

>>18595413
Humans and sheep are both mammals, it's the same process. Besides, it'd be pretty pointless to outlaw something impossible.

Oh, and for the record, I am a scientist.

>>18596838
>I am a scientist
Where? Somalia?

>>18596851
Funny quip. Does little to prove your point. Human cloning is possible, regardless of how you feel about it.

I want to clone a female version of myself so i won't be so lonely and will be able to have rough sex whenever i want
>insert 'go fuck yourself' joke here

>>18596838
>Humans and sheep are both mammals, it's the same process.
As mentioned above in detail it's a vastly different process. Cows and sheep have little quirks that make certain things with Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer a little easier than in other mammals. They also had the benefit of having large amounts of egg cells available (since they're regularly slaughtered).

The process for mice is completely different. For example you need a vibrating pipette to help penetrate the cell membrane to remove the old nucleus. We are far far more closely related to mice than most other mammals, and we have some of the same weird quirks they have. But several new techniqies have had to be developed for primates just to get close to beginning to clone.