Neanderthals, Lets Clone Them

It seems as theres some controversy regarding this subject in the scientific community, i don't believe it's so complicated. In my opinion we only have knowledge to gain about our past by bringing them back to "study".

Now when I say "study", I don't mean we should clone one, keep it in a zoo cage and see what comes of it, not at all. I don't see why we can't clone one and raise it like a normal child with an adopted family. With the purpose of revealing the difference in full potential between us, if they had survived the ice age to live with us side by side today. Enroll it in school like any other child and see how it makes out.

Perhaps clone two of them, so it has a friend That would probably make them feel a lot more at ease to have someone else just like themselves to relate to. Theres no reason why they have to be monitored 24/7 till they die assuming they possess the mental capacity to assimilate into modern society which would make itself apparent within a few years of it's birth.

People seem to think this would be unfair to this/these individual(s). On the contrary, once they start to grow up I think they'd be celebrities of some sort! They'd be in the media spotlight from birth, known around the world, given a standard of living most of us could only dream of and all the opportunities available to succeed in life.

I think it would've been fascinating if they survived and we had two distinct species of humans living together. Of course it's not generally in our nature, historically, to be accepting of those different than us.. maybe it's best we made it alone, to bring them back only now when we've become more tolerant.

I realize we're not at the stage where we're able to clone them yet, when we are, I think we should. Thoughts?

Do we have the tech to do this? I'm not up to date in the cloning field, but if we do i say it is a rather good idea the way you put it. Let him live a normal life. Once a week check ups for scientific purposes. If it's possible, do it!

Originally posted by screamo
Do we have the tech to do this? I'm not up to date in the cloning field, but if we do i say it is a rather good idea the way you put it. Let him live a normal life. Once a week check ups for scientific purposes. If it's possible, do it!

Not yet.. we're on our way though! We recently mapped the mytochondrial DNA of Neanderthals, the next step would be to complete the gnome. Human cloning is still illegal, I wonder if this would apply only to homo sapiens or to Neanderthals as well? It's speculated that human cloning experiments are already taking place in other countries, I'm sure if scientists put their mind to it and it was legal, it would happen.

I'm assuming a human surrogate volunteer would be needed to carry it to term.

Originally posted by screamo
Do we have the tech to do this? I'm not up to date in the cloning field, but if we do i say it is a rather good idea the way you put it. Let him live a normal life. Once a week check ups for scientific purposes. If it's possible, do it!

who's "we"...
and how are you, (op) using the term "let's" ?

you personally going to start a foundation/company and hire top geneticists and anthropologists?


i'm sure it's been done.
but not by people you'd consuder ... "us"..

-

Originally posted by prevenge

Originally posted by screamo
Do we have the tech to do this? I'm not up to date in the cloning field, but if we do i say it is a rather good idea the way you put it. Let him live a normal life. Once a week check ups for scientific purposes. If it's possible, do it!

who's "we"...
and how are you, (op) using the term "let's" ?

you personally going to start a foundation/company and hire top geneticists and anthropologists?


i'm sure it's been done.
but not by people you'd consuder ... "us"..

-

I actually assumed the majority of people on ATS would have the common sense to realize by "us", I meant humans/people/the scientific community; as was implied in the context.

I don't know why you felt it necessary to go out of your way to point out I cannot personally clone an extinct form of human in my spare time..

I will not partake in any conspiracy theories dealing with some mysterious "they" force, so I will speak in regards to what was originally posted about, and that's referring to the scientific community.

As far as cloning Neanderthals goes, it's a touchy subject, and for a good reason. They would be the only two of their kind in existence. It is unknown what level of intelligence they have and what level of awareness they have. Would they be able to learn a language as complex as English? How complex are their emotions? The surrogate parents could be in for one hell of a ride.

The best theory for human evolution puts us apart from the Neanderthal man, as genetic evidence shows we weren't the same species or of the same descent/ancestry. Would we be able to get along all this time later? How did they die out? There are a lot of questions that can't be well answered, at least not by me, in this topic.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by OnionCloud]

[edit on 19-8-2008 by OnionCloud]

*only kidding*

nice thread ;-)

We clone the Neanderthals, put them in a zoo,....n i c e

this is what humans do, i think...
things like that


Nia

could we also clone Nephilims ? as long as we can find undamaged DNA )

Originally posted by sty
could we also clone Nephilims ? as long as we can find undamaged DNA

)

What's a Nephilim

I don't think bringing them back would be so bad.. I mean we're pretty damn good at destroying life, creating life wouldn't be so terrible would it?

Originally posted by sty
could we also clone Nephilims ? as long as we can find undamaged DNA

)

It's hard to find DNA for something that most likely has never existed.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by OnionCloud]

Why bother cloning a bunch of knuckle draggers ?

Why not clone some super models ?

Originally posted by Ravinsomniac
Why bother cloning a bunch of knuckle draggers ?

Why not clone some super models ?

You didn't get your cloned super models already?

Originally posted by OnionCloud
I will not partake in any conspiracy theories dealing with some mysterious "they" force, so I will speak in regards to what was originally posted about, and that's referring to the scientific community.

Then why are you posting on a web discussion forum titled "Above Top Secret"?

Couldn't you discuss this type of topic in your chosen frame of mind, elsewhere?

Given the fact that we are talking about conspiratorial material here, meaning, "the planning of two or more individuals in contrary ideals towards an individual or group of people however large?"

Who's out of place here? you taking this illusionary pretend "we" idea as what the warm fuzzy "humanity" can "do" together scientifically?

Or me, who , on a conspiracy forum, points out that most likely than not, if it were to be done, it would have been done first chance, by privately gov contracted labs or the gov itself, behind closed doors and not released to the public because of it's value, or only released at a specific time when that information was valuable to release, not just randomly "done" because it's a "neat idea" that the public would like to see done.

But what I'm suggesting is impossible and completely implausible right?
And there would be no strategic or financial benefit in keeping this type of information developed to it's perfected form and prepared before release.

I think you should check the title banner of the web page again before you try to conduct yourself as if you're somewhere on the web that you're not.

Expecting others to view your posts that maintain that no nonsense there's no "us" there's no "them" attitude... in the one place on the web where you'd expect that exact mindset, is just backwards.


-

[edit on 19-8-2008 by prevenge]

Then why are you posting on a web discussion forum titled "Above Top Secret"?

I am posting here because I enjoy discussing scientific topics from the point of view of a skeptic. Skepticism is healthy, and the topic of this thread isn't about whether "they" exist, even as the original user of this thread stated, it's about science. Perhaps you need to reread some posts here.

Couldn't you discuss this type of topic in your chosen frame of mind, elsewhere?

I can, and do post on many other forums. I enjoy seeing different perspectives from other people, and I don't have to justify my presence to you on this board any more than you do to me.

Given the fact that we are talking about conspiratorial material here, meaning, "the planning of two or more individuals in contrary ideals towards an individual or group of people however large?"

What's that have to do with not wanting to use the term "they" to refer to a force that isn't proven to exist and doesn't by all logical scientific evidence? If I don't agree with someones theory it is my prerogative to choose if I believe it or not, and if I don't believe it I don't have to discuss it or use it in my post since it doesn't impact my point. I didn't want to use any sort of governmental conspiracies in my post and wanted to make it clear from the beginning.

Who's out of place here? you taking this illusionary pretend "we" idea as what the warm fuzzy "humanity" can "do" together scientifically?

This sentence doesn't make sense, please reformulate it. I didn't refer to any warm fuzzy feelings, I was simply positing the question on what level of awareness they had relative to us, and what their behaviour would be like. I also stated that they aren't related to humans directly, evolutionarily speaking, since the original post asked for our thoughts.

Or me, who , on a conspiracy forum, points out that most likely than not, if it were to be done, it would have been done first chance, by privately gov contracted labs or the gov itself, behind closed doors and not released to the public because of it's value, or only released at a specific time when that information was valuable to release, not just randomly "done" because it's a "neat idea" that the public would like to see done.

No one is out of place, and I didn't say you were. I said that I don't believe in what you believe, and don't want to partake in that theory so that my post couldn't be misconstrued.

The rest of your comment here doesn't make sense. Randomly done? Neat idea? What other things are randomly done because they are neat ideas? We're not talking about Myth Busters, here. I'm pretty sure scientists generally don't wake up in the morning, call up a bank for a loan, and then talk to a newspaper the next day about how they want to clone a Neanderthal.

But what I'm suggesting is impossible and completely implausible right?
And there would be no strategic or financial benefit in keeping this type of information developed to it's perfected form and prepared before release.

Did I say there wasn't? Did I discuss any of these points in depth? No, and I said I didn't want it to affect my post, because it really doesn't, and I didn't want people to infer it in any way. There would be a scientific advantage to having the first cloned Neanderthal, I suppose, if you really want your name in the history books.

I think you should check the title banner of the web page again before you try to conduct yourself as if you're somewhere on the web that you're not.

Yes, I see a banner that says "deny ignorance", and that's what I'm doing by saying that I don't believe in a particular theory before I make my post.

Expecting others to view your posts that maintain that no nonsense there's no "us" there's no "them" attitude... in the one place on the web where you'd expect that exact mindset, is just backwards.

I don't expect anyone to view my posts in a particular way because I don't know who's reading it. There are a wide range of people on these forums and they all conduct themselves uniquely, and I wouldn't expect anyone to change their point of view to match mine simply because I say it's right. All I can do is offer my point of view, hopefully have a civil discussion, and see where it goes. Skeptics like myself don't even have to agree with each other, regardless of their point of view. That doesn't prevent them from having a discussion about the subject at hand though.

Not everyone, even conspiracy theorists, believe in "they" or "them". You do, and that's great. Keep with it, I hope helps you in some way. However, it is unfair to others for you to immediately assign them a belief system simply because you want to, or believe they should.

I didn't set out to talk about a governmental conspiracy because the topic didn't implicitly imply that point of view, and when posts of that manner started popping up I made it clear that I don't partake in that point of view. That's it.


[edit on 19-8-2008 by OnionCloud]

[edit on 19-8-2008 by OnionCloud]

"Neanderthals, let's clone them".

Why, there's so many of us here already! ug!

Take me back to the cave anyday.

What we need to know about Neanderthal physically, we pretty much already know by studying the fossil record. Not to say that there isn't much more to learn about them, but that it's not a real high priority for us. We know how similar we are physically. What really interests paleontologists and sociologists however is how they behaved. How they learned. What their culture was like, their beliefs, their language, and at what stage of social advancement did they ascend. These are things we cannot reproduce in the lab - and invariably, placing a Neanderthal child in a private home with human parents will horribly skew the child towards homo sapien sapien culture, language, etc... etc...

Even recreating an entire Neanderthal family in a lab would be pointless - as there would be no Neanderthal culture for them to be innudated with. Leaving them to their own devices for several generations to see what culture, language, or society arise would be far too long of an experiment and risk far too much contamination. It's impractical.

I have heard about some type of genetic regression of our dna.

If we did this, we might better understand where we came from. But, if the gnome is similar, than why bother? Shouldn't we go forward?

Still, I would wonder if this was originally the way our species was dumbed down, possibly by some advanced race who thought we were going too fast for our own good.

Our advancement might even be programed and locked into our dna for a specific time period or awakening.We could all become like Tesla or Einstein or look like aliens with those almond shaped eyes and no dicernable genetalia.

reply to post by aleon1018

But, if the gnome is similar, than why bother? Shouldn't we go forward?

Evolution doesn't work like that. We aren't evolving towards a certain point, and it will not make us arbitrarily stronger, faster, smarter, etc. It only makes us more well adapted to our environment. Evolution may not continue to make our brains grow larger and more capable. It may reverse course and make our minds smaller and less capable. There's certainly reason to, as the brain is an extremely high energy organ to maintain. Nearly 1/4th of all the calories you intake go solely to supporting the brain IIRC. Larger brains certainly hasn't been a boon to our hominid ancestors - as out of all of them we (homo sapiens sapiens) are the only remaining survivor. Even our closest relative and sister speicies Homo Sapien Idaltu is extinct. We haven't really been around long enough to see whether or not our own species will stand the test of time.

Intelligence may well be an evolutionary dead end.

This process may even be occurring right now. I don't want to get into the racially charged and intellectually vacuous debate over race and IQ potential - but it's no secret that those who do better in an environment where higher IQ should normally be selected for tend to have less children. That environment prods intellectuals to pursue their careers and their educations over starting a family. Birth rates in first world nations have fallen dramatically over the past century. Meanwhile in third world countries where the economy and labor pool mainly consists of farming and light manufacturing, families tend to have many more children to help support the farm and family. Intelligence isn't really as selected for in these areas, since education levels and opportunities to use that education tend to be poor or non-existent.

So it may well be likely that no "alien race" would even need to dumb us down. We may be doing it ourselves without ever even realizing it. However, long before this ever happens we'll have the technology to guide our own evolution in as little as a single generation through gene therapy techniques as well as augmenting our already existent capabilities with technology.

Our advancement might even be programed and locked into our dna for a specific time period or awakening.We could all become like Tesla or Einstein

As said, this point would be absolutely moot. Why would we be designed to "evolve" to a certain point in which we haven't already attained when even we can recognize that long before we reach that point - that technology will have advanced to the level in which we no longer have to rely on natural evolution to guide our development? By the end of this century we'll have the technology to make everyone into Einsteins and Teslas. Many of us will probably live to see it.

Originally posted by ANoNyMiKE

Originally posted by Ravinsomniac
Why bother cloning a bunch of knuckle draggers ?

Why not clone some super models ?

You didn't get your cloned super models already?

I guess that was the yellow ticket I found in my mail box just yesterday from the Postman, saying that I had a large delivery at the Post Office !!!

I ordered 2 blonds, 2 brunettes and a redhead.

Have to be careful not to order too many redheads....

Here is a photo of a reconstructed Neanderthal child. Not really that different from us. In other words, you wouldn't see 'the clone' walking down the street and ask, 'What in the world is THAT!?!' I'd be up for it.