Scientists around the globe have started to (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/01/0125_050125_chimeras.html) create human-animal hybrids.

Already some hybrid-species are created, a pig with human blood and a human-rabbit species.

When they actually succeed with creating animals with the intellect of humans, what will that mean for us?
Will that proof the existance or non-existance of free will? The existance of a soul?
Will these hybrids be the next Untermensch? Do those 'people' get rights at all?
Seperated toilets, for humans and hybrids, seperate Communities to distinguish the humans from the Chimera 'trash'.
The next soldier or the next guinea-pig?

Or will they replace us and become the Ubermensch, as in the next step of evolution/revolution?

So many questions are flowing through my heads now, if we as humans create an intelligent conscious species in the lab, that will bring our species to a whole new level, by becoming gods ourselves.

A human-rabbit species? Is Playboy paying for the research? :shake:

To be considered a god you should be able to make something out of nothing. I don't consider this anything more than playing with what's already there by using high-tech tools. I find the whole thing more bizarre than anything else.

It is not natural, it is not right.

To be considered a god you should be able to make something out of nothing.There is a guideline for gods hmm? So thats why God dissapeared, he got jailed. :D


It is not natural, it is not right.
But Sarevok, you know that the Internet isn't natural, so what are you doing here?

Cool! I want myself a dog with wings!

Finally, I can make myself a cat without any ass. That will surely save 50% of the work with them.

Oh, and why not remove the front part as well, to remove another 50% of the work.

The moral of my lame story is: Don't mess with nature, or nature will mess with you.


I told ya it was lame. ;)

But Sarevok, you know that the Internet isn't natural, so what are you doing here?The internet is not a living creature.

Have these scientists fully weighed the consequences? What if these creatures are more aggressive than the normal animals?

Sure Impossible Creatures was an interesting game to try, but that's why it was cool--it's only a game...

Killer bees, anyone?

"oh, it'll be fine if we make some africanized honey bees....oh. Whoops. Guess we made a booboo"

Creating chimeras, she said, by mixing human and animal gametes (sperms and eggs) or transferring reproductive cells, diminishes human dignity. I'm not sure I get this. If these experiments can aid in medical research and do not create a thinking being, what's the "dignity" issue?

I think the bigger concern here is on the religious front. For those who truly believe, what's the impact on the soul, do animals have souls and, if not, does the hybrid get one or part of one? Is there original sin in a created hybrid?

As a basically non-religious person, I am completely unqualified to answer any of those questions.

Chev ?? The Alley of the Rosary is calling . . .

Everything man can do to give us more knowledge we should do, at least once, out of curiousity if nothing else. Would be cool if we could bring chimps and dolphins to conscience, a whole race subservient to us! And this time they are truly of a different race and not just superficial pigmentation differences which made the whole thing quite unsavory. Imagine, if we wage devastating wars against each other due to slight differences in how we perceive the world the conflicts we could have with sentient beings of a whole other species!

As the article says, Chimera's are cross species hybrids which have been around for a long time, the Liger/Tigon and even the common Mule are all examples, obviously feelings run deeper/higher when you're talking about adding a human to the mix and doing it artificially.

Personally, I don't like the idea but I'm not sure I can articulate why. So for the time being I'll go with Saverok. It's not right.

Oh Joacqin, how about a cat with wings?

http://www.messybeast.com/winged-cats.htm
http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/cabbits3.html

As far as I know, animals don't have souls according to the Christian teachings, hence man being able to freely kill them. I'm not sure if the Pope would approve of toying with any of the God's creations like that, however. Heck, I'm not sure I would.

Well a section from Revelations mentions heaven with someting along the lines of 'All the people and God's creatures'. I will try to find the chapter and verse if anyone is interested.

If an animal did not have a soul then its even more wrong to kill them freely as they should enjoy what little life they have got!

To Carcaroth, give the cats bat wings, that would go nicely with the 'cats are evil' thread.

Would any males here want their sperm mixed with animal eggs?

"Planet of the Apes" is right around the corner.

I have mixed feelings about this research.

QUICK! Someone lock and sticky this thread! Tal just inferred obedience to the Pope!

No, animals do not have souls. Although we can't be certain about the ultimate destination of animals, we know that they don't share in ours. We are, however, held accountable for treating them properly and justly.

The problem with animal cloning is that it will inevitable lead to human cloning, which has always been staunchly opposed by the Church.

The 'animals' mentioned in the Revelation of St. John are symbolic for other things, not literal beasts...although if they were, it would be sound evidence of cloning. ;)

If it mentions humans and creatures of heaven, what are the creatures of heaven?

I think this 'research' is completly pointless. It would be better to concentrate on curing cancers.

I find this kind of experiments very disturbing and a remark like: " Everything man can do to give us more knowledge we should do, at least once, out of curiousity if nothing else" (joacqin) makes it even worse. Did you never hear about Dr. Mengele and his scientific experiments ?

[ January 28, 2005, 16:22: Message edited by: LeFleur ]

Good thing joacqin isn't a scientist.

But wait, isn't part of this Chimera line a merging of Human tissue with animals? They are talking about having mice injected with tissue to create a human brain so that they can kill them and do research on that for such things as Alzheimer's. Does the mouse with human brain tissue have a soul?

How about the pig with human blood?

Where is the line drawn?

No, animals do not have souls.How do you know?

According to the Christian doctrine, Sarevok•.

Hacken Slash, don't worry, I don't do it often... Even though I'm Catholic, I have more disagreements with the Pope than not...

Chev ?? The Alley of the Rosary is calling . . .They'd better leave cloning alone. Is it bad to create a mouse with a human ear on its back, used for a transplant? I can't say.

Is it bad to create a human with, let's say, a snake tongue or tiger claws or wolf fangs? Yeah. Hybrids are even worse.

As for the soul in human cloning, I can't say. Is a lab-made human really a human person? If yes, then it must have a soul. If it's not a human person but a collection of cells, then it doesn't.

How about creating human (supposedly) beings from genetic material collected from the dead? Is it a copy or a separate human? It surely is not the dead person per se, you can't call a soul back.

There many answers missing here and there's a lot of potential for wrong beyond what we can imagine.

Perhaps the art of creation should wait until we actually ascend to Godhood...

Is it bad to create a human with, let's say, a snake tongue or tiger claws or wolf fangs? Yeah. Hybrids are even worse.Actually I wouldn't mind the claws or fangs... would be great fun at hallows eve.

Frankly I don't see the problem with experimenting with this branch of genetics. If somehow they can mix certain characteristics of different animals or even put some 'human' cells into an animal and produce 'helpful' medical and commercial products more power to 'em!

They've been working on mixing spiders and goats of all things. The aim of this was to 'milk' spidersilk from the goat-spider hybrids giving us an infinite source of incredibly strong metal (spidersilk being one of the most durable substances on earth).

However, I'm agnostic so I'm for all those 'nasty' genetic experiments that seek to defeat cancer, cure HIV or improve livestock growth.

I think it's a sick idea, and the people who came up with it should be hung.
Really, i hate messing with the works of nature.

It is not natural, it is not right Well, humans have been genetically modifying organisms since they settled down and started selecting crops and doing cross-fertilisation... And as told earlier, also in nature hybrids exist... Lion/tiger hybrids, mules and such... So it can't be that unnatural ;)

I think it's a sick idea, and the people who came up with it should be hung.
Really, i hate messing with the works of nature.
Tell that to us when you're lying in a hospital waiting for a car-accident so you can get that life-necessairy donor organ, while there are 500 people before you in line...

Imagine that we can genetically manipulate animal, so the organs can be transferred to save humans lives? Why would you oppose that?

(And btw, the article goes only about genetically modified animals so they can either be used as experimental animals (to test drugs and such, with a higher degree of accuracy)...)

I don't know whether you actually opened your eyes today, but there is a huge shortage to donor organs (going from kidneys to hearts to simple blood)... If this can help us decrease that shortage, it only helps us... And thus should be applauded and not be opposed...

It is not fair on the animals, it should be opposed.

Like livestock, Sarevok? Spending their entire lives waiting for the inevitable 22. to the head or butchers mallet? You'd better be a vegiterian, Sarevok or your argument holds no water. You'd better not have any leather products either.

Most of our modern technology, medicines and standard of living can be contributed to our ancestors being 'unfair' to animals - keeping them in bondage and using them as slaves. In this case it's just another form of slavery.

It is not fair on the animals, it should be opposed. And letting people die while there is a valable alternative is fair?

Yeah right...

Most of our modern technology, medicines and standard of living can be contributed to our ancestors being 'unfair' to animals - keeping them in bondage and using them as slaves. In this case it's just another form of slavery. Do you think our ancestors made or that we are going to make a wrong decision if we decide to continu using animals to prevent loss of lives?

Hell yeah, let people die instead of killing animals. Why does the human deserve to live and not the animal? At least animals are not constantly destroying the planet they live in every day of their lives.

Well, Sarevok, I'd pick a human over an animal any day. If you want to narrow it down you could simply say that a human has the potential to live longer than an animal (bar a few) so a human's life is more valuable than an animal's.

But I'll take the George Bush argument and say: you're either with us or against us.

Sarevok, actually, animals do constantly destroy their environment.

yeah, beavers... mink...

Hell yeah, let people die instead of killing animals. Why does the human deserve to live and not the animal? At least animals are not constantly destroying the planet they live in every day of their lives. And after this is the part when you go: "Do you know what I hate most, Mr Andersssssen? It's the smell." ;)

As for me, I don't really oppose or condone this stuff but I'm with Abomination and the others on this one. I'd choose a person over an animal any day.

You know, I don't think human beings are actually destroying the planet. We might be messing up the environment, which is our environment and of course the animals' environment, but the earth and organic life forms will still be around. Heck, some organisms have probably flourished, like the rat or the cow (if you consider flourishing the ability to pass on your genes, which is what we're making our livestock do). Even if we manage to do something crazy like nuke every piece of land and kill ourselves in the process, there will still be bacteria and insects that will surive, and evolve over the span of eons, in accomodation to oil spills, air pollution, etc.

Okay, on the real topic, I would like to point out that dozens of years ago, urea was sythesized, thus disproving the idea that there were some things only animals or humans (as creations of God or otherwise) could produce. A while ago, a virus was created in a lab. And of course, man has bred mules and has had his fun with animals (not that the latter resulted in anything real, although the results sometimes pops up in mythology).

But frankly, I don't think there will be that much controversy over this ten years after I make this post - stuff about the Middle East and the American president will probably dominate "Alleytalk," since there will probably be a long way before anyone dares to do something like that (definitely governments stepping in). If it ever comes to some sort of human-animal hybrid, I hope that they will be treated as mentally retarded people, who at least receive care and attention from caring individuals.

(I apologize for this post, which is pretty bad as far as rambling posts go here.)