Latest on MJJC

Cloning company, Clonaid, commends Michael Jackson for his 'pioneer vision of human cloning'

BUMPER SNIPPET, I agree with you. Some day we might be able to clone a body - but not a mind.

BUMPER SNIPPET said:
However, today technology doesn't allow us to do it as humans ar much more complex than plants and some animals.
Click to expand...
Most of all, the ethics of human cloning is an extremely controversial issue.

And btw, all the clone sheep (Dolly & Co.) didn't live very long ...
 
even if michael was cloned he wouldnt br the michael we knew and love different person some body like a twin unless yoyu could grt the soul cues creepy music.
 
dont really get this cloning. so he would have the same talent or is it all about cloning the physical being and nothing else?
 
elusive moonwalker said:
dont really get this cloning. so he would have the same talent or is it all about cloning the physical being and nothing else?
Click to expand...

Elusive,

Cloning is still a 'new' technology. There is much they still don't know about why we are 'who' we are. We could actually get an exact duplicate of someone and have them be nothing like the 'original' because environmental differences, cultural differences, and many other factors play into part.

So, for example, it may look like and sound like...but maybe could not even sing like. Hard to know.
 
Beachlover said:
We could actually get an exact duplicate of someone and have them be nothing like the 'original' because environmental differences, cultural differences, and many other factors play into part.
Click to expand...

This is what also the twin research found out. Twins, as similar as they may be, can develop very differently in different surroundings. Even the physical features can vary in age due to exterior influences, and only 40% of those characteristics can be defined genetically.
 
Samtkaninchen said:
This is what also the twin research found out. Twins, as similar as they may be, can develop very differently in different surroundings.
Click to expand...

Its very true what you are saying, so it isn't like you can really duplicate someone.
 
Whether there is a soul or not, it is not important, because the living being can be reproduced or cloned. What cannot be cloned is our life experience. And even if we were able to clone the memory, which is highly doubtful, we cannot clone something that we didn't actually experience on our own skin.

As far as ethics are concerned, you are right, it is a big problem. However, the researchers try to clone only human organs for transplants in case of an accident or a serious sickness. That way we wouldn't need donors and could save many lives. But even a simple organ is extremely complicated to clone and we are not sure of its efficienty, just like the cloned animals who actually live but not very long.

I think we still need a good couple of hundred years before starting such an extremely difficult task, meaning that we are quite far away from mastering cloning techniques (if in the meantime we don't blow away our planet with our SUVs and petrol based energy).
 
the reason the sheep didnt live very long is that she was cloned from a somatic cell which meant at birth she was already 6 years old.

IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO CLONE A PERSON

this thread is invalid :lol:

I certainly agree, so little is known of the brain, it would be foolish to attempt it, yet if indeed we ever should.

There are far more important things, very very few teams focus on this type of work.
 
elusive moonwalker said:
dont really get this cloning. so he would have the same talent or is it all about cloning the physical being and nothing else?
Click to expand...

No he would just look the same.....he wouldn't have Michael's personality...or anything that Made Michael ..Michael....the clone would only have the genetic make up of Michael....that's all.....after all there is only one MJ....and he could NEVER be cloned...:love:..:blush:
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Whether there is a soul or not, it is not important, because the living being can be reproduced or cloned.
Click to expand...
I think this is important because this is what actually defines someone as a unique being. But so far nobody is able to explain what this that we like to call soul - in the absence of a better term - really is, it's not tangible. There is more than just a chemical process, and this is what makes this so complex.
 
prismsagainst5live said:
this thread is invalid :lol:
Click to expand...

...but interesting ... :hysterical:
(Who am I? Do I really exist? Cogito, ergo sum.
sy_schildlol.gif
)
 
Laura.L. said:
So, according to this "fan", FBI has a clone of Michael working as a slave for them? Alrighty then, guess I gotta go free that poor clone now :gun2:


Seriosly though, that's crazy. :no:
Click to expand...

Yes, seriously. We all thought that was but a hater making fun of people. S/he was later banned. So the clone was never released.... poor clone :thinking:
 
Last edited:
Samtkaninchen said:
I think this is important because this is what actually defines someone as a unique being. But so far nobody is able to explain what this that we like to call soul - in the absence of a better term - really is, it's not tangible. There is more than just a chemical process, and this is what makes this so complex.
Click to expand...

The problem when it comes to scientific experiments is that you cannot involve random or blind faith in something and say it doesn't work because of that belief. Nothing indicates that a living being is not unique even without a soul.

Subjectively speaking, I myself believe in existence of souls, but neither I nor anyone else can prove it.

Objectively speaking we cannot prove the existence of the soul because it is unobservable by any means. However, the cloning is something feasable and observable. What I meant is that it is not important if we believe in the existence of souls or not, because if one day we clone a human being it would mean either that we actually created or cloned the unobservable soul or that the soul does not exist.

So let our minds keep open and admit that cloning will probably be possible in the future. All the same, if the birth in vitro is possible today, it doesn't mean that those babies have no soul. Likewise, if one day we clone a human being it wouldn't mean that we either created a soul within him or that it doesn't exist. We can't prove the existence of soul, but neither can we prove at what moment -if it exists- is formed in our body.
 
Cloning is or will be possible but with it comes ETHICS.

Ethics in the sense of "WHY" would you clone someone. There was a great movie called the "Clonus Horror" I think where they cloned exact bodies with the intention of harvesting the organs for their counterparts if ever needed. It raises questions as to 'why' you would clone a person. For what ethical purpose?

We already have issues with people like Octomom abusing things such as fertilization....can you only IMAGINE what would happen if we can clone people?

The reality of it is that you would have to treat the duplicate as a person also. The other interesting movie was "Multiplicity" where he clones 3 people and each have a distinctly different personality. Quite funny if you want to watch it. Michael Keaton plays 4 parts. One is smart and just a little rude, the next is 'gay' and the next is rather 'dumb'. Pretty funny.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
I've read all your posts, but it seems that nobody is really aware of this ClonAid company. I am just warning you do not ever trust that company as they work hand in hand with an atheist sect called Raelism.

Indeed the only objective of this company is to collect money and pretend to clone people and respect so called anonimity of the clones. In fact, as someone here who works in genetics already said it all, nowdays it is impossible to clone a human being.

As far as this sect is concerned, they actually believe that God does not exist, that the whole Bible and Kur'an are misinterpreted based on the word Elohim (plural of Eloh/Ilah/Allah) - God. They pretend that Elohim means "those who came from the skies", in other words Aliens from another planet with a highly advanced civilization and that they actually created us and all the living beings on earth thanks to the advanced genetics. They believe that cloning is the key to eternal life and that one day we will become just like those "Elohim" i.e. gods and create life on other planets.

What they don't say is that all these ideas come from some science fiction novelists from the 50s and 60s.
Click to expand...

ummmm, those aren't atheists. An atheist believes we do not have a creator.

And it is possible to clone a human being. the technique and everything about the process is the same for any mammal. It's just highely unethical as they have a very high birth defect rate. It's probably been done already and we just don't know about it.

it's highly doubtful that Michael would have had himself cloned.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Cloning doesn't work onlmy on sheep. It works on plants, vegetables, fruit and flowers. So theoretically it could work on human beings. However, today technology doesn't allow us to do it as humans ar much more complex than plants and some animals.

But, even though we clone a human being one day, the problem is that you clone only the physical body, not the memory. So even if one day let's say Michael, you or I were cloned, we would be phisically identical, but individually totally a different person, just like twin borthers or sisters.

Cloning a memory is just like saying cloning a dream, impossible.
Click to expand...

if you remove the nucleus from a human egg, and replace it with the nucleus from a human cell from a person you want to clone, shock it with two electric jolts and implant it in a women's unterus, you got yourself a human clone!
 
dancemasterman said:
ummmm, those aren't atheists. An atheist believes we do not have a creator.
Click to expand...

As a matter of fact they are atheist, they claim it themselves. They don't believe in the beginning or an end, they believe in an eternal existence without beginning or end.

By the way "atheist" doesn't mean without a creator, but someone who does not believe in existence of God, from the Greek prefix "A-" (without, or UN-, or NON-) + "THEO(S)" (GOD).
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
As a matter of fact they are atheist, they claim it themselves. They don't believe in the beginning or an end, they believe in an eternal existence without beginning or end. ).
Click to expand...
That's not an atheist belief. even if they call themselves atheists, their belief is more closely aligned with scientologists. It's the opposite of Atheism. Just because somebody calls themselves something, it doesn't mean they are actually that. I too am an atheist.

but to believe in God and call yourself an atheist, would be like like agreeing with the communist ideology, but then calling yourself a libertarian.


).
By the way "atheist" doesn't mean without a creator, but someone who does not believe in existence of God, from the Greek prefix "A-" (without, or UN-, or NON-) + "THEO(S)" (GOD).
Click to expand...

I hate to tell you this but creator=God, at least in this context it does.
 
dancemasterman said:
That's not an atheist belief. even if they call themselves atheists, their belief is more closely aligned with scientologists. It's the opposite of Atheism. Just because somebody calls themselves something, it doesn't mean they are actually that. I too am an atheist.

but to believe in God and call yourself an atheist, would be like like agreeing with the communist ideology, but then calling yourself a libertarian.


).

I hate to tell you this but creator=God, at least in this context it does.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that it is not because you call yourself by a certain name that you are actually that. You can claim to be Duffy Duck and I can claim to be Bugs Bunny, but we are not.

However I think you misunderstood their principle of belief. They do not believe in an eternal supreme living being called commonly "God".

They believe that the word used in the Bible "elohim" is nothing godly, but simply humanoid living beings from another planet. They believe that simple people like us are able to use advanced science and clone cells to create life. Hence, you cannot call them really creators because they actually didn't really create matter out of nothing. Everything was already there and they simply assembled it. Hence, in that sense we cannot equal the concept of that kind of "creators" to what we commonly call "God" who creates matter out of nothing and who by definition is of divine essence, meaning that he was never born and will never die.

As far as this sect is concerned they also believe that those who allegedly created us had been created by other humanoid living beings using cloning techniques. This again is nothing godly and we cannot deny the fact that they are indeed atheists.

Also, if you are an atheist, it does not mean that you don't have your own opinion on how we came to existence. It is not because you don't share their atheistic point of view that they aren't atheists, i.e. denying a supreme being called God which is the common ground for all atheists.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
The problem when it comes to scientific experiments is that you cannot involve random or blind faith in something and say it doesn't work because of that belief. Nothing indicates that a living being is not unique even without a soul.
Click to expand...

I don't have the time right now to get into this but I would like to set one thing straight: With soul I do not mean soul as a religious term! There are several definitions of this term, and I mean it as:
The animating and vital principle in humans, credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion and often conceived as an immaterial entity.
Again, I don't understand the term soul in a religious way here.

Perhaps it has a bit to do with a language barrier since I am not sure if soul has the same meaning in each language.

(*lol* Slowly this topic becomes a philosophical discussion ... :D)

sy_whiteflag01.gif
 
Samtkaninchen said:
I don't have the time right now to get into this but I would like to set one thing straight: With soul I do not mean soul as a religious term! There are several definitions of this term, and I mean it as:
The animating and vital principle in humans, credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion and often conceived as an immaterial entity.
Again, I don't understand the term soul in a religious way here.

Perhaps it has a bit to do with a language barrier since I am not sure if soul has the same meaning in each language.

(*lol* Slowly this topic becomes a philosophical discussion ... :D)

sy_whiteflag01.gif
Click to expand...

I understood you, no worries. I wasn't necessarily refering to soul as a religious term either. So indeed, we could have the kind of soul you defined, which means difficult to conceptualize :) However if it the soul you tried to define is well present within our body, then it would mean that it doesn't matter how we come to life, this soul will always be a part of us.

All in all, be it religious or not, I believe that soul (if there is such a thing scientificly speaking) is not something we create or clone, but it is something that we cannot prevent from being a part of a human being when that human being comes to life regardless if it's by natural birth, in-vitro birth or by cloning technique.
 
I don't believe MJ cloned himself but I know he was into science and medicine and I would not be surprised if he was supporting these innovative technologies and research around gene technology. MJ felt free to do all the surgery on his face to create...why not this....but this all sounds mad. This cloneaid comp is a bit strange and can be linked to all sorts of cults....similar to scientology. I found this from online which is scary and awful attemp to recruit MJ fans into Scientology illegally using MJs image. I am sure the estate did not want this:This is some crazy stuff and I don't want to know more.

http://showbiz411.blogs.thr.com/200...ology/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

This cult is associated with this Clonaid company

http://raelianews.org/news.php?extend.376

I found an interesting article on the same topic:

http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/article.php?id=4763
 
Last edited:
Muumi said:
http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/article.php?id=4763
Click to expand...

Interesting article. The only problem I have is that it says MJ's "fascination with cloning was first reported by the Mirror, a UK tabloid, and then picked up by The Telegraph and a number of tabloids and entertainment outlets." And the name Uri G. is somewhat suspicious to me. Yeah ... :scratch:

But putting this aside for a moment there again is this point I already mentioned.
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
All in all, be it religious or not, I believe that soul (if there is such a thing scientificly speaking) is not something we create or clone, but it is something that we cannot prevent from being a part of a human being when that human being comes to life regardless if it's by natural birth, in-vitro birth or by cloning technique.
Click to expand...

According to the article Muumi mentioned MJ allegedly was "obsessed with immortality". Leaving the question whether this is fact or fiction out of consideration I don't think it is possible to "create" the same person again. In my opinion there will never be another MJ again even if there is a clone. A cloned MJ possibly would be alike - but never identical. It will always be another person, very much alike - but not the same. Do you see what I mean? Imagine if you would be cloned during lifetime this would mean that - according to the belief that someone can live on in a clone - you necessarily would live two lifes, you would feel the "me, myself, I" in both bodies at the same time. And this for me is not possible.

MJ was interested in science and in visions of the future, this is out of question. But again, I have some qualms if those specific reports are true just because of those sources ...

But this topic is very thought-provoking.
sy_idea02.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top