South Korean Scientists Cloned Glowing Cat

DesR85 · Post by **DesR85** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:36 pm

While I was browsing DailyTech yesterday, I come across an article in the science section titled: [url="http://www.dailytech.com/South+Korean+Scientists+Clone+Glowing+Cat/article10042.htm"]South Korean Scientists Cloned Glowing Cat[/url]. Creepy. It just smacks of scientists playing God. Just my opinion.

Comments?

Eric V · Post by **Eric V** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:39 pm

i agree i mean whats the point. didnt anybody learn from star wars attack of the clones

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:55 pm

Well if it does lead to breakthroughs in medical science, it will be extremely interesting. Since I don't have the background, I won't comment on the potential feasibility of any of it though.

I admit, however, that I'm uncomfortable at using animals in this sort of manner.

Eric V · Post by **Eric V** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:59 pm

my wife has 4 cats so i know she wouldnt be down with it thats for sure

Tricky · Post by **Tricky** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:26 am

Hmm. Actually, I think I could appreciate a night light that can walk with me to the bathroom. :laugh:

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:47 am

Tricky wrote:Hmm. Actually, I think I could appreciate a night light that can walk with me to the bathroom. :laugh:

Hmm - was thinking something similar

Maharlika · Post by **Maharlika** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:01 am

Talk about pervs...

... you guys have this thing for cats in the bathroom?!!!

Nasty. :mischief:

@Des: That's a step ahead towards apocalypse if you ask me.

Tricky · Post by **Tricky** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:29 am

Ooo, a glow-in-the-dark Catwoman! I could definitely like that!

Vicsun · Post by **Vicsun** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:58 am

If relatively simple gene modification is scientists "playing God" and it worries you, I'm interested in your opinion on the following piece:

Synthetic DNA on the Brink of Yielding New Life Forms

It has been 50 years since scientists first created DNA in a test tube, stitching ordinary chemical ingredients together to make life's most extraordinary molecule. Until recently, however, even the most sophisticated laboratories could make only small snippets of DNA -- an extra gene or two to be inserted into corn plants, for example, to help the plants ward off insects or tolerate drought.

Now researchers are poised to cross a dramatic barrier: the creation of life forms driven by completely artificial DNA.

Scientists in Maryland have already built the world's first entirely handcrafted chromosome -- a large looping strand of DNA made from scratch in a laboratory, containing all the instructions a microbe needs to live and reproduce.

In the coming year, they hope to transplant it into a cell, where it is expected to "boot itself up," like software downloaded from the Internet, and cajole the waiting cell to do its bidding. And while the first synthetic chromosome is a plagiarized version of a natural one, others that code for life forms that have never existed before are already under construction.

The cobbling together of life from synthetic DNA, scientists and philosophers agree, will be a watershed event, blurring the line between biological and artificial -- and forcing a rethinking of what it means for a thing to be alive.

Moonbiter · Post by **Moonbiter** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:55 am

I tell you, it's the mice paying them to do it!

For the future of all micekind! This is probably great news for the partied-out ravers on Ibiza....

They use a fortune in glowsticks.:laugh: Oh, and no more dead cats along the roads.

DesR85 · Post by **DesR85** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:52 am

Vicsun wrote:If relatively simple gene modification is scientists "playing God" and it worries you, I'm interested in your opinion on the following piece:

Synthetic DNA on the Brink of Yielding New Life Forms

It has been 50 years since scientists first created DNA in a test tube, stitching ordinary chemical ingredients together to make life's most extraordinary molecule. Until recently, however, even the most sophisticated laboratories could make only small snippets of DNA -- an extra gene or two to be inserted into corn plants, for example, to help the plants ward off insects or tolerate drought.

Now researchers are poised to cross a dramatic barrier: the creation of life forms driven by completely artificial DNA.

Scientists in Maryland have already built the world's first entirely handcrafted chromosome -- a large looping strand of DNA made from scratch in a laboratory, containing all the instructions a microbe needs to live and reproduce.

In the coming year, they hope to transplant it into a cell, where it is expected to "boot itself up," like software downloaded from the Internet, and cajole the waiting cell to do its bidding. And while the first synthetic chromosome is a plagiarized version of a natural one, others that code for life forms that have never existed before are already under construction.

The cobbling together of life from synthetic DNA, scientists and philosophers agree, will be a watershed event, blurring the line between biological and artificial -- and forcing a rethinking of what it means for a thing to be alive.

And what does that have to do with cloning? Care to explain?

Vicsun · Post by **Vicsun** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:49 am

DesR85 wrote:And what does that have to do with cloning? Care to explain?

Nothing; I'm simply interested in your opinion.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:34 pm

Vicsun wrote:Nothing; I'm simply interested in your opinion.

One could say it has everything to do with cloning, and with introducing a vector carrying new DNA into the genome as I assume was done to produce the glowing cats. I've heard about the synthetic DNA projects, and I certainly believe it will become reality, it's just a matter of time.

What do I think about scientists playing god? Well, scientists, and a lot of other people as well, have been "playing god" for a very long time now. The human species have altered a variety of "natural" processes including energy cycles, ecosystems, climate and our own life and death. Future use of synthetic DNA does not change the principle of human decisions' influence of life on earth. What's the difference between systematic creation of plants and animals subspecies only to provide us with food, and cloned cats with a simple gene alteration? Is the creation of synthetic DNA more of "playing god" than the creation of medicine that saves the lives of millions who would "naturally" have died otherwise, or intentionally dropping a bomb or two that kills millions of people?

I am not sure what the expression "playing god" actually means, but as I understand it, it refers to taking the questions of life and death into your hands. If my understanding is correct, please somebody explain to me how glowing cats and synthetic DNA is more "playing god" than has already occurred for a very long time.

On a lighter note, these glowing cats may finally make me think pet cats have a use

Queen_Articuno · Post by **Queen_Articuno** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:41 pm

Cloning, Glowing Cats

This is IMHO, but cloning is "playing God", so to speak. It disturbs me how mankind feels like he has to interfere in every natural process. (I hate to bring up religion, but....) The Bible refers to mankind's purpose being to "be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28) In the selection I just typed up, you will notice the word subdue in italics. The reason for this is the original meaning of subdue was to study an object. Today, it means to rule over something.
So, mankind wasn't meant to use knowledge in potentially destructive or chaotic ways. (End religious discussion.)

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:20 pm

So, mankind wasn't meant to use knowledge in potentially destructive or chaotic ways.

I do appreciate what you are saying, and I hope you have the same views on issues like dropping atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki...

But, you also need to realise that not everybody shares your beliefs, so pronouncing what mankind was or, was not, intended to do is irrelevant to somebody who is not of your particular faith.

Lady Dragonfly · Post by **Lady Dragonfly** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:42 pm

I am not a Bible scholar by any means but I seriously doubt that the Bible suggests that breeding is the purpose of mankind's existence. The real purpose is to learn how to properly mix a Martini (shaken or stirred?).

Anyway, I can't speak for the whole mankind, but I like the idea of glowing pets - not only the Hell kittens but also "pigs that actually glow bright green in the dark". It's so cool.

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:47 pm

The Bible refers to mankind's purpose being to "be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

With respect, no, it doesn't. The bible merely says that its god told a pair of humans to do this. It's not a declared purpose for their existence, or by extension, for all their descendents. To state otherwise would be like saying that a particular family patriarch back in the 16th century who directed his sons to "become wealthy" meant that to be Their Purpose, their goal in life, and that he meant it for their 21st century descendents, too. I strongly doubt that.

Anyway, I can't speak for the whole mankind, but I like the idea of glowing pets - not only the Hell kittens but also "pigs that actually glow bright green in the dark". It's so cool.

I imagine it would lend a festive air to nighttime cow tipping parties.

Queen_Articuno · Post by **Queen_Articuno** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:21 pm

fable wrote:With respect, no, it doesn't. The bible merely says that its god told a pair of humans to do this. It's not a declared purpose for their existence, or by extension, for all their descendents. To state otherwise would be like saying that a particular family patriarch back in the 16th century who directed his sons to "become wealthy" meant that to be Their Purpose, their goal in life, and that he meant it for their 21st century descendents, too. I strongly doubt that.

It does too! *points out cited verse* It says so right here!

Fiberfar · Post by **Fiberfar** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:15 pm

It would be a lot easier to see glowing deer and other animals along the road when you're driving. A glowing moose is a lot easier to see than a normal one.

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:25 pm

Queen_Articuno wrote:It does too! *points out cited verse* It says so right here!

Please re-read what I wrote. I not only explained how the biblical quote you provided did not indicate "mankind's purpose," but also provided an analogous situtation as an example. You are welcome to argue my points if you wish, but simply insisting "I read what I read, and I'm right!" without considering the possibility of misinterpretation does little to encourage others to respond to your posts.