Slashdot Mirror
Human-Animal Hybrids Fail
SailorSpork writes "Fans of furries and anime-style cat girls will be disappointed by the news that attempts to create human animal hybrids have failed. Experiments by British scientists to create embryonic stem cells by putting human DNA into cow or rabbit eggs had raised ethical concerns, but the question of how we would treat sub-humans will have to wait until we actually figure out how to make them."
I believe that, at least in the case of cat-girls and bunny-girls, that question has already been answered.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
I was looking forward to Giraffe man.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
A human-chimp hybrid was just elected president of the united states you insensitive clod!
...five assed monkeys. Why?
Maybe we should resolve the ethical concerns before we perform the science ...
This is opening Pandora's Box.
"Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
enough about some other guy's sexual fantasy life being destroyed
can we get back to the urgent need to make fully human women with four breasts and two vaginas now please?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
But would cow and rabbit be the most likely candidates for human hybridization? Wouldn't chimp make a lot more sense?
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
To bad DNA doesn't work like this. This is almost as bad as someone thinking the can make 'atomic super men' ala Futurama.
Rabbit eggs? I guess the easter bunny has to make money somehow in the off-season.
Making a human-animal hybrid is a waste of time, the real challenge is making something far superior to man.
The five-assed monkey.
My one hope for not dying a virgin geek...crushed like a grape under a giant anthromorphic fighting robot's foot. I'm doomed...
Guess I'll have to go with my backup plan to hack into a government mainframe and accidentally create Kelly LeBrock during a lightning storm. ;)
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
...but the question of how we would treat sub-humans will have to wait until we actually figure out how to make them.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Hell, we're still dealing with how people should treat other actual humans.
This guy's the limit!
This has a lot of the same false problems that seems to plague morality based discussions of human cloning. The idea that a clone is going to be some sort of non-human entity with no moral standing one way or the other is just plain nuts. If you clone a person then that person has all of the rights any other person would have. It's really just a complicated way of giving birth. Even these human-animal hybrids are badly named, as they aren't going to be catgirls or manbearpigs or anything of the sort, just normal people with a really weird birth.
The only time ethical concerns should really come into play is when you're attempting to convict someone of a crime based on DNA evidence, but it's not like the law has not had to deal with this sort of problem before. Identical twins have already generated plenty of precedents to draw from.
It drives me crazy when congresspeople are spending hours and hours talking about how cloning is an affront before god and has to be stopped, but can't seem to make a good argument as to why other than citing bad movie plots or vague "They won't have a soul!" type arguments.
I read the internet for the articles.
There goes the live-action Thundercat movie!
The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity....Calvin
"how we would treat sub-humans will have to wait until we actually figure out how to make them"... I think it's time to start to give it some thoughts. This is quite a bit different from creating a car, telephone or light bulb...etc.
We hold you sub-omegaloids in the highest regard!
Hierarchy of geekdom. Published scifi authors at the top, furries at the bottom, erotic furries below that.
http://www.brunching.com/geekhierarchy.html
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
It would seem more beneficial to try to give specific animal abilities to humans such as increased sensory or physical ability rather than make animals more human. I would think that the only real ability we have is our thumbs and higher reasoning skills, which would need to be intact to truly benefit the animal. Making a dog .5 IQ points smarter by inserting human genes to stimulate brain development makes great science, but isn't that useful in practice. It would need to be a huge jump to make much difference for the animal. Making a human produce more red-blood cells, or more muscles, or stronger immunity, could make a huge difference in athletics (where world-records are broken by milliseconds) or medicine.
Forgive my spelling from time to time. I'm often posting during short breaks.
More-or-less haphazardly mixing up nonhuman cells/genes with human ones (which is, at present, all we're technically equipped to do) is almost certain to fail.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
I guess this proves that manbearpig is a figment of the imagination.
Anybody want my mod points?
Whatever happened to doing things because we *could*, rather than because we should?
Relevant to this discussion:
http://memepedia.info/images/f/fb/Furry_classification.jpg
Also this:
http://burrowowl.net/shimmie/get.php/7929%20-%204chan%20chart%20hierarchy%20high_res%20humor.jpg
The Furry prevention task force, they win!
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
Such an ugly term. How about Parahuman?
Privet hedges is the only other species to have 23 pairs of chromosomes - the same as Man. We should be cross-breeding humans with plants!
Skunk included a short comic exploring the result of getting a catgirl in your bed. It wasn't pretty!
Some kind of PigBearMan?
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
Anyone else read the title of this Slashdot story, and thought it was about how much anime and furry fans fail? ;)
the question of how we would treat sub-humans will have to wait until we actually figure out how to make them
Why? I think it _should_ be the other way around.
I really find myself wondering, where's the "duh" tag for this article? Sheesh. We've known for *decades* that radical hybridization simply don't work. Anyone remember the totato / pomato? Not the grafted gimmick plant, but the actual genetic hybrid? Yeah, didn't think so. That didn't work either.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Many animals have natural immunity to diseases that we don't. Or digest particular foods better then we do, or have instincts of healthier activities, such as preferring the taste of vegetables over high fat meet. Lets say for example we bread a human with a shark and a rabbit. Immune from Cancer however prefers vegetables and able to digest vegetables more efficiency.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Is the failure caused by a lack of manhood?
http://idle.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/27/1521213
I think congress is worried some scientist might clone a hybrid person with a donkey and put them out of business.
This isn't about sex . . . you're heavily invested in the brassiere and tampon industry, aren't you?
I'll see your five-assed monkey, and bet you a three-peckered billy goat!
So there!
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
"putting human DNA into cow or rabbit eggs"
No wonder it doesn't work. Cows don't even lay eggs!! Must be the UN scientists...
They should have tried bonobos -- apparently they have sex simply to say "hello".
I, for one, welcome all the excess catboys. They can have a sanctuary from fursecution in the relative safety of my home.
(Captcha: Fiendish)
Haha, for a second there I thought it said "Human-Animal Hybrids Fail"
...Oh wait... it did... Eeewww.
Sex. Drugs, and Unix.
i make a throwaway sophomoric sex joke and i get serious analysis and get rated "insightful"
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
...there'd be hundreds if not thousands of sheep-boys running around West Virginia.
Furries will also be disappointed to read the headline "Study questions usefulness of animal-human embryos".
nonconformity at work
We call them liberals.
Don't have a cow man!!
They don't work yet. We just don't know enough about how life processes work yet, but maybe sometime in the future we will. My guess is that it'll take 10 or 20 years before we're anywhere close to pulling it off though (and I really pulled those guesses out of my ass).
I read the internet for the articles.
I for one... ask WTF? Why? you sick baistards!
The person who wrote the summary doesn't seem to understand what the research is trying to do. They aren't trying to make part human/part animal creatures. They are trying to use animal eggs to grow human stem cells, by injecting human DNA into the egg and getting it to reproduce. The outcome that they're looking for is a mass of human stem cells that could be used to, say, create a new organ for a person who needed a transplant.
I for one welcome our new race of furry overlords.
Wow, this place is slipping. If you want something done, you have to do it yourself.
Although, think about a half-cow/half-Cowboy Neal...
A cat-human hybrid would be kinda disappointing anyway. I think the current solutions work well enough.
Don't cats have really short lifespans anyway?
*imagines having to euthanize a catgirl*
weird shit, man.
Why am I the first to post this? Man, the slashdot community is getting lazy.... :)
No "first post" not "I for one welcome our new Furry overlords".. Not even a think of the children!
The above comments are not guaranteed to make sense to anyone other than the author...
He already is half cow. That's why it's in his name.
It's just a lot more fun to imagine that they were talking about making furries.
You're forgetting that the premise of Dark Angel was human-animal chimeras.
I'm guessing if they looked anything like the actors/actresses in that show (eg, Jessica Alba), they'd be a little more accepted. Unfortunately, the show also had their earlier 'failures', which were a little less human looking, and might qualify in the uncanny valley / furries area.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Why not use the term "sur-human" instead?
And we're tired of people like you who treat a sentient life form as fucking science project! Then you scream, "but... but... I'm not a Nazi! I'm experimenting on ape-men, not Jews!"
... that ever read the Ballad of Lost C'Mell?
Or the Dead Lady of Clown Town?
The Underpeople?
Come on slashdot...
has an interesting proposal on how to treat them:
Here
Tomacco, on the other hand, was a huge sucesss.
Perhaps reading the Island of Dr. Moreau is in order.
And more to the point, if we can't use the technology to give ourselves night-vision eyesight, superstrength and the like, what's the point?
But I'm pretty sure nothing went wrong in the womb.
So what, the Welsh have been been trying for 2000 years, and the Welshman I met the other day suggests that they have been successful!
Part of why I mentioned the pomato is that the potato and tomato are both members of the same genus, Solanum, a.k.a. the deadly nightshade family. For that matter, tobacco is part of the same grouping, making the apocryphal tomacco another intra-genus hybrid. Yet none of these intra-genus hybrids is viable.
Now, what the article is talking about is hybridization of species even further apart, walking back up the taxonomic tree by several nodes. If we cannot even produce viable intra-genus hybrids, we sure aren't going to be producing viable intra-family, intra-order, or intra-class hybrids any time soon. FWIW, my own guess is that it'll take us 10-20 years to get an intra-genus hybrid, and much longer for hybrids of species further apart -- partial genetic borrowing notwithstanding, such as the glow-in-the-dark pigs crafted using certain jellyfish genes.
Basically, my point is that, in the absence of any hybrid between humans and chimps or bonobos, the two other extant species widely regarded as the most closely related to H. sapiens, we should not be the least bit surprised that hybrids with species that aren't even *primates* should fail in utero, and I would go so far as to say that their failure would fall firmly in the "No shit, Sherlock" category of unsurprising. (No offense meant, just stating my personal view of the article.)
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Of course it will fail. Gene's, DNA and proteins are not 'plug n play'. If you want cat eyes, there is a lot more then trying to mix cat eye dna with human eye dna. The brain has no clue how to use a cat eye, the body has no idea how to maintain it.
It is possible, but not by some nub methods like these.
Whatever happened to doing things because we *could*, rather than because we should?
I totally agree. Also, if I felt someone who is creating suffering sentient mutants needed to be killed, I *could* do that.
But seriously, all morals are obviously relative. I mean what if it turns out humans are to be a very bad addition to the universe. Like all other intelligent aliens out there are magnitudes more peaceful and we are like the equivalent of Species 8472. So, any actions leading to the destruction of the human race would be considered a "good" thing.
I for one would of welcomed our new sub-humanoid overlords.
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
Timothy I believe it is time for you to turn in your BOFH license if you do not know how to treat sub-humans.
I'll have someone head right over to rebuild your machine with Vista.
While certainly gross and disturbing on many levels, it does remind me of a particular Doctor Who quote from the episode, The Doctor Dances, where the venerable Doc states:
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
If people concerned about meat become vegetarians, then what will the plant hybrid person eat?
puts a new twist when you say, "I ate your mom last night" ..."on a bun with your aunt porky"
I have a one-word answer for why this won't happen any time soon:
Monsanto.
Seriously. This company (along with a few others) is doing everything within its capabilities, legal, ethical, or otherwise (mostly otherwise), to monopolize food production. Talk about power! There's simply *no way* they would support the development of any technology that would allow humans to avoid having to eat.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
yiff! yiff! yiff!
Breading something means to coat it in flour and egg before cooking. You meant BRED, the past tense of breed.
To meet someone is to say "hi", meat is muscle tissue.
I suspect you misspelled on purpose to troll the spelling nazis (which would be different than the spelling nasties).
And your ideas are no better; animals don't have a "natural immunity" to disease, they just catch different ones than we do. You don't get parvo or distemper, for example. Different species digest different food because they evolved in ecological niches where that food was abundant.
Humans aren't getting fat because they eat meat, no matter what PETA says. We are omnivores, and as such we need nutrients found in meat just as we need the nutrients in nuts, fruits, and vegetables.
Vegetarians don't live any longer than omnivores.
We are getting fat because we evolved in a world with a scarce food supply, and are now in a world with plentiful food and fattening drinks that don't take away hunger. How many fat people do you see in those pictures of Somalia?
I mentioned spelling nazis earlier, now I'm really going to pull a Godwin on you - the types of genetic modifications you are suggesting are little different than the eugenics the Germans were attempting to practice.
Free Martian Whores!
[emphasis mine]
Maybe they have resolved those concerns. Maybe they even tried to put those "concerns" into words, and once they did (they tried to explicitly state the problem that you (and everyone else on slashdot, whenever biotech stories come up) neglected to state but merely cryptically aluded to) they realized they had little to be concerned about.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Jerry Was a Man
Free Martian Whores!
SailorSpork writes "Fans of furries and anime-style cat girls ..."
I call bullshit on this right out the gate.
There is NO SUCH THING as a fan of a furry.
None.
Furries are mocked and persecuted throughout the internets. In real life, parents (realizing that it is too late to leave them hobbled in the woods) disown them. The feeble-minded openly deride them. Even juggaloes cannot abide the presence of furries.
I understand the occasional grammar or spelling mixup. I really do. But to allow such an egregious error to be posted is on par with a summary detailing the efforts of General Fred Rogers leading his unicorn cavalry against the Mongolian horde.
"We shall grapple with the ineffable, and see if we may not eff it after all." - Douglas Adams
Whatever happened to that?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
It seems more plausible than preservation of favoured races. Why did we stop questioning this?
Cat-girls involve humans who have been genetically altered to have these features, not animals who have been spliced with human genes.
By the way, hybrids have been shown to work between plant and fly and plant and worm, among others.
Maybe they're just doing it wrong.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
George Carlin IIRC.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
We've known for *decades* that radical hybridization simply don't work.
the jackass is a crossbreed of a donkey and a horse.
It's been around since we had metal tools.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Well I, for one, will continue my somewhat more primitive attempts at creating a half man/half sheep, half man/half horse, and half man/half cow hybrid.
These are the sacrifices I make in the name of science.
TFA isn't about creating fully-formed hybrids, it's talking about putting human DNA into animal embryos and getting stem cells with that person's DNA.
And again Tobacco is of the genus Solanum, along with belladonna and aubergines, the defining feature being the ability to produce bitter alkaloids such as solanine where it gets the name from.
Thats why you shouldn't eat green potatoes, they'll give you nerve damage in sufficient quantities (fairly low quantities)
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
More on this in the next issue of "The New England Journal of Evil"
. . . anyone remember Lamarck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarck)?
His approach would be simple, and would only require 13 cats, 1 chick (of child-bearing age), a gallon of Elmer's glue, and yourself.
The step-by-step:
Damn, that Darwin, and his "Natural Selection" hooey . . . life would be more interesting under Lamarck.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Modern armies are increasingly making use of Unmanned Ariel Vehicles (UAVs) that have high-res thermal cameras on them - and sometimes laser target designators and missiles too.
Most of the footage is boring, but sometimes interesting stuff happens. And sometimes clips of the interesting stuff leaks out onto the Interwebs.
These clips are colloquially known as "Predator Porn" - so one day, I and a colleague Googled that term, looking for UAV clips.
What we got was TOTALLY unexpected.
It seems there are people out there who really like the movie "Predator". I mean, REALLY like it....
*shudder*
DG
Furries are fans of each other.
Wasn't it humans trying to breed with monkeys that (at least in theory) was the cause of AIDS?
No don't be stupid much more likely the initial transfer was caused by the widespread practice of eating bush meat in Sub-Saharan Africa (from whence it is believed AIDS originated. Now I might be wrong given the pretext of the article but isn't that a tad more likely than transference by someone sodomising an ape.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
It has been known for a while now that enucleating an egg (i.e. removing its nucleus) and putting the nucleus of an adult cell inside it seems to do somewhat of a reset. This makes a little sense, since mammalian eggs have chemicals and chemical gradients necessary to uncover the right genes to start off the process.
Given how hard it is to get eggs from humans, other animals would be ideal.
The thing is, the nuclei of these eggs are removed. There is one thing of the animals' genes that would remain, though: the mitochondria. That's why you can trace just your maternal line through your mitochondria - they are provided almost exclusively by the egg. If this ever gets used for actual cloning, imagine how this could screw up a deep ancestry project!
Mitochondria do pretty much the same job and have done so for aeons. They do mutate faster, though, so there *might* be other jobs that they are doing for us that are slightly incompatible. On the whole, though, probably not. In the end, chances are that the only fantasy "hybrid" part of this is human cells with animal batteries.
There's a lot of basic research left to do to see how cow and rabbit eggs (especially the ever-copious rabbit eggs!) differ from human eggs in terms of the chemical environment they provide, but once we figure that out, we will have another avenue of making stem cell equivalents, valuable for all sorts of things including spinal cord repair.
Cloning is a little different than therapeutic stem cell application would be, however. You cannot just throw cloned 'stem' cells into a body - you will get a teratoma: a disgusting ball of flesh with all the body tissues in it. You need to coax it down other development paths first. You can wait for a cloned embryo to develop and take out that particular kind of tissue, which is where some ethical considerations come in, or you can apply hormones and other chemicals to do the job.
Binary geeks can count to 1,023 on their fingers
the jackass is a crossbreed of a donkey and a horse. It's been around since we had metal tools.
And it's been blaming its poor work on them ever since.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Unless you want to share with your friends, two vaginas and four breasts are useless.
Hey now, don't forget about us: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphallia
Cheers plasmacutter, but the key term here is "*radical* hybridization". The donkey and the horse are quite closely related, both belonging to the genus Equus. (I'm a bit surprised to learn that they aren't regarded as taxonomically closer, to be honest. :) Consequently, your comment misses the mark WRT my problem with the article -- that the failed hybridization of widely distanced species should come as no surprise.
That said, your comment here would make a good rejoinder to part of my other post in this thread.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
We cannot handle the truth. It is us who are hybrids of apes and pigs.
Because then I could argue that" Yes, they may be experimenting on their own kids but at least they did not abort them.
Where do you draw the line?
Hard to say, which is precisely why I have a problem with abortion. At some point, between conception and the age of legal majority, we have a legally protected person. But birth seems arbitrary.
-- Support a free market in the field of government
Oh they're using rats and bunnies today? Looking at the _SCUM_ running the world today, they must have used snakes and lizards before.
Of course they said it failed, because the outcry of people against doing it would be massive. I can hear them now, 'Take your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!', all the while denying the whole thing.
I'm sitting here amid my human-animal hybrids and am getting a real kick out of these replies. Dr. Moreau
They tried to make a chimera and failed!
Next the British scientist's daughter and the family dog misteriously disappear a day prior to a visit from the research agency that would evaluate whether to keep his grant or not...
Well, no subhumans except for the Amelekites - "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling [ed. note: a suckling is what you refer to as a "just-born child"], ox and sheep, camel and ass." (I Samuel 15:2-3.) The Ammonites are likewise done to death in II Samuel 12:31, the people of Jericho in Joshua 6:19, the whole population of Ai in Joshua 8:25, and of course all the firstborn of Egypt (again including the cattle) in Exodus 12:29-30.
Last, but not least, there's the Biblical authorization of slavery in Leviticus 25:44 - "As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may aquire male and female slaves."
Come to think of it, the set of "subhumans" would appear to be "everyone who isn't in the tribe," so there's quite a few of them around.
For sale: one sig space, gently used. Inquire for details.
I am actually happy this happened. This sort of atrocity should be completely banned. These would be conscience beings, it is not the right of another person to manipulate the bodies of artifically engineer bodies that would be inhabited by other conscious beings. There are too many ethical questions, and especially from intentional and unintentional manipulation of intelligence and as well life experience, we are esseentially engineering their lives which we should not havea right to do that. Something such as life should be left to the randomness of nature, which does not have an agenda or any evil schemes. Animals and people have a right to be unique, to be their own people, and uniquely created by the randomness of nature rather than have their identity and characterists defined and dominated by someone else. This is very little different from surgically altering animals or people to suit the agenda of some scientist, for whatever evil purpose, to make them more subservant or docile, or what have you. The right to physical autonomy over ones body extends to the right to a natural body randomly generated from nature for a unique one of a kind, autonomous identity out of the control of anyone else.
What the hell is a pornato and where can I get one?
What makes you think that this research will be used just to create brain-dead sources of stem cells? What makes you think that scientists won't also try to let hybrids become viable children to see what happens when they grow up?
These experiments mostly entail shooting human nuclei into animal cells. On a small scale, in a petri dish, it can be useful to "see how things work," but brought to term, if nothing goes horribly wrong, you'd just end up with a human with the cell membranes of the donor animal -- likely susceptible to all sorts of new zoonoses, at little benefit to anyone.
Then, what happens when this person you've created, who's just a regular guy or girl except for his/her stunning susceptibility to hoof-and-mouth disease or FIV or swine flu or something, wants to have kids? In theory a little diversity can't hurt, but in practice, it sure can if the result is a 'bridge' for some awful virus with "animal" hosts to start mingling with human DNA.
...how does putting human DNA into an egg cell make the resulting cells partly animal? Basically, the egg cell isn't much more than a container for the human DNA in the nucleus. If the cells reproduce, and keep duplicating the *human* DNA, and the human DNA determines how those cells develop and form specific functions, then it's still human. I just don't see where DNA-coded information from the animal's DNA gets mixed.
The fundamental difference is that these scientists are fabricating new lifeforms in a laboratory. By your ridiculous standard, I'm playing God whenever I change the oil in my car because I am sustaining its viable existence.
Wouldn't that just cause a plant to make fruit like a tomato that has roots like a potato? Or did it make fruit like a potato, with roots like a tomato?
Personally, I preferred the tomato-tobacco hybrid. It produced enough nicotine to kill a man after half a tombacco sandwich!
They should just ask George and Barbara Bush for advice. But then again, one simian is enough.
It's not very well known among non-spud-farming types, but most potato varieties *already* produce fruit very much like a tomato -- only too rich in toxic solanine to be edible. Have a look here for a picture.
The pomato graft uses a potato rootstock with a tomato top, so yes, the idea is to get both tomatoes and potatoes from one plant. The pomato genetic hybrid was ostensibly a weird attempt at producing a tomato with a thicker skin and longer shelf-life. Pomato grafts work, but apparently don't taste too good. However, genetic hybrids don't work -- they don't live long enough to grow very big before their genetic oddities produce too many mistakes, and the plant dies -- assuming it even germinates.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Ha you fools ! ;-)
You don't hybridize rabbits and humans all in one step. first u add lots of human genes to rabbits.
cross breed those rabbits that have expressed the most human genes if you're so lucky and then add more human genes again and repeat.
Do the reverse with some humans (this step may take a long time so you may need some life extension formula unless you figure out how to speed the human part using hybridized cells to make other hybridized cells adding more rabbit cells each time. after say 20 generations in vitro, you may if things go well have hybrid cells which may need to be converted to stem or sperm cells...which should then be used with the hybrid rabbit eggs.)
Another technic perhaps should be to succesively hybridized the rabbit in vitro with creatures closer to humans one step at a time. say dog, pig, monkey...human. A more direct method is to skip all this dabbling and creating an artificial genome by copying desired sequence from he human genome into the rabit... somehow i fear its easier to put the rabbit into the human than the other way around. ethics aside, this will be more useful 'ahem cough cough' to evil lords everywhere.
Imagine transferring the genes expressing growth and machority to human hybrid...
Now grow yourself a slave army or mob or laborer in a few months. In this case we still have a problem of course because a rabbit cannot bear the offspring so... In any case, a pig would make a better all around candidate for a human animal hybrid.
There
Wally the dabbler.
So are all those all sheep stories just myth, or is that what the researches were doing?
Now I might be wrong given the pretext of the article but isn't that a tad more likely than transference by someone sodomising an ape.
You might be appalled by this, but in third world countries, people are taught that the initial AIDS transmission occurred after someone "had relations" with an ape. At least I was taught that by a "abstinence only" group that gave a lecture back when I used to go to middle school in Mexico...
Part of why I mentioned the pomato is that the potato and tomato are both members of the same genus, Solanum [wikipedia.org], a.k.a. the deadly nightshade family.
Does any of this have anything to do with the fact that at Expert Alchemy, potatoes and tomatoes suddenly gain Damage Health stats? Cause, you know, there is that vampire cave outside of Skingrad that I really want to clear out.
You mean to tell me that squirting random chunks of DNA into the zygote of another species doesn't result in a viable crossbreed? No! Get out of here!
I, for one, welcome our new Human-Animal Hybrids overlords!
I assume you assume there is no supreme authority. OK—granted for the sake of argument. Now, why do you think that if the God of Abraham doesn't exist, then relativism is the only possible alternative?
It can't be, because no sensible person could possibly embrace a view as naive as the one you express, if he gave it even a little thought. Relativism means that we have no common moral ground. You can screw anybody you want to, and I can screw you—and you will have no right to complain about it. Are you sure you want to hold this position?
The segue into "might makes right", followed by "it's OK, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" is left as an exercise for the undergraduate reader.
What absolute twaddle; what a waste of perfectly good words. You, sir, are one of the reasons I don't teach any more. It's too tempting to introduce students like you to Mr. Glock. "Do you really want to argue for relativism, young man? That's a 148 grain Black Talon up the barrel, and I'm having one of my gullible days, so think carefully before you answer."
You must admit, and armed philosopher concentrates the mind.
Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
Mommas, don't let your babies grow up to be cow-boys!
There's still the possibility of:
- Fembots
- Matrix-like VR
- Deceiving meatspace women with AR hacks (prerequesite: ubiquitous optical implants)
- Pop culture fashion trend where intelligence is sexy (hey, it could happen)
- A future economy where geek jobs pay well
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I'm not too sure you understand the premise.
No sig today...
The big mistake was using Apple Computers to control the whole park. Had they used a proven system, maybe the dinosaurs would have never escaped containment. Maybe somebody here should write the director and find out.
On the same token, it was the Apple Computer who uploaded the virus onto the alien spacecraft in Independence Day. Some here would argue Windows would have been more effective, but I'm not so certain.
I dont really know where I'm going with this, but according to the product placement I've seen in movies, macs tend to be in the middle of tricky movie situations. This should be considered when creating your own private human-animal hybrid.
Why would we want to do this sort of thing?
I can't think of any logical reason.
Efforts to create cross species have been successful in the covert world for decades, including with humans. Stories of the actual application of this type of genetic engineering are only now beginning to be published, and certainly not for any cases involving humans. One recently published story involves the creation of goats with spider genes, allowing the goats to create silk: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%2F1%2Fhi%2Fsci%2Ftech%2F889951.stm&ei=vQqJSaGsHpmQsQOpzY2mBg&usg=AFQjCNHvc8y53tq9HFonHsM3RDNxB1RrWg&sig2=mL3a3essg9tEAaZz85YcKw
Actually, a jackass is just a male donkey (ass). You seem to be thinking of either the mule (offspring of a male donkey and female horse), or the hinny (offspring of a female donkey and a male horse).
Yeah. I really like Ubuntu, but I'd like the UI of my Mac. I think I'll just put their binary code in a big pile and mix it up real good. Maybe we'll get a new operating system!
Imagine the ire of an entire new species at the implications of that.
D
"how we would treat sub-humans" might not be the relevant question. What if they turned out better than us? It wouldn't be too impossible..,.
Does this mean Jessica Alba is not real? I'm gonna go cry now.
ah, my mistake then.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
I am a furry and... I couldn't care less?
The human-animaal fiction I enjoy is not related to this research at all.
The idea even disturbs me a little.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
There really is a point at which, no matter what your personal opinion on the matter is, unless you can prove a personal stake in the matter, you should just let it go
I agree that this point exists, and my child rearing techniques could land me in jail in Germany. However, just because a point exists doesn't mean that there aren't things beyond it.
To take another thing, what about slavery? Did people in the North have a personal stake in the matter? If not, what gave them the right to force abolition?
-- Support a free market in the field of government
Why is this not tagged X-Files. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
I though the general population of Alabama had pretty much proven this already. Human/sheep, human/goat, human/cow, etc... Then there are several examples in the porn industry with women and dogs or horses, which haven't produced any results either...
Conditional logic does not make black and white issues into any shade of gray. You say it's a bad thing to be deprived of your freedom. I agree. Let's not stop there though, continue to "drill down." If there exists in some arbitrary society an individual whose actions are considered a danger to that society or its members, a reasonable person would conclude that it is "right" for the violating member to be locked up. (Necessary caveats: it should be required for the imprisoned to have a chance of self-fulfillment as well. The current practice of locking someone up without any rehabilitation or training is "wrong" imo.)
What looks from a distance to be varying shades of gray is most likely the alternating black and white of a tree built on a set of conditional rules.
Furthermore, _complete_ relativists should be actively promoting anarchy as it is the only societal model that fits their views. Reasonable people have a "bedrock" morality that is really very stable across cultures.
While these are cheap to come by. Bovines and rabbits are both herbivores with some serious differences in their metabolisms. This is an issue because, donor eggs have donor mitochondria. Cows, for example, have nucleated red blood cells for oxygen transport. This is a more primitive energy system and less efficient. Rabbits and cows, unlike humans, both rely on several chemosynthesis paths for making various proteins that are not present in plant material and cannot synthesize several nutrients that are always in present in their food. Chances are their mitochondria are slightly more adapted than primates to these traits being presence. This may be what is causing the problems as the mitochondrial DNA may not code for traits that it expects to exist in its host. It could also be something as simple as a hormone in their eggs that is slightly modified from human proteins, which is more likely for these animals because herbivores make more of their own proteins than we do and thus are more likely to have a mutation in these pathways. I suspect that we need to use more primate like creatures or test various primate hormones to see if any bypass the issue.
Spay refers only to removal of the female sex organs.
Neuter refers to removal of sex organs and is technically gender-neutral, but is most commonly used to refer to the removal of male sex organs. Probably because "neuter" sounds better than "castrate".
"I am am become death, destroyer of worlds." Ring any bells?!
I was just wondering... isn't part of being human having a moral system?
What's funny to me is the classic egghead response that goes into the moral relativism quagmire. I used to be like that. Then I grew up. Being wise means you have learned from things you should have done; or better yet, NOT done.
The simple replies with Nazi examples and atomic bombs etc were perfect. There really is no need to take things to the "Ivory Tower." I mean, seriously, just try to live a complete moral-relativist lifestyle and see how far you go. Most eggheads are not all too physical if you know what I mean? Thus, chances of surviving this "because-I-can" world greatly diminish if you did not have a moral system that trumps the "because-I-can" instinct of the physically and biologically superior human to just walk up and smash you weaker ones and remove you from the gene pool.
Be thankful that we can act according to some ethical and moral standards. And be worried that many people dont!
All science is either physics or stamp-collecting.