| Welcome to The Round Table. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Genetic Engineering and Cloning | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 6 2013, 10:48 PM (1,688 Views) | |
| Alterbean7 | Nov 6 2013, 10:48 PM Post #1 |
![]() ![]()
|
What are your thoughts on genetic engineering and cloning? For example, genetically engineered pets like globefish and bringing back prehistoric animals. I kind of think within the next 20 years there could be a mammoth born, they've found intact blood and bone marrow, but a mammoth nuclei especially in good condition would be hard to find. The dodo would also be a possibility for bringing back, there are a lot of mummified remains and they only went extinct about 400 years ago. Also, GloFish. Genetically engineered glowing tetras. They injected the genes of jellyfish and corals into tetra eggs to create fish that glow under black light. ![]() What are your opinions? Edited by Alterbean7, Nov 6 2013, 10:50 PM.
|
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 6 2013, 10:52 PM Post #2 |
|
Pull my finger!
![]()
|
Not tetras, but danios. There are many genetically-modified animals out there, some controversial, while others are just beneficial. |
![]() |
|
| Alterbean7 | Nov 6 2013, 10:55 PM Post #3 |
![]() ![]()
|
The picture shows danios, but they also created tetras.
|
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 6 2013, 10:58 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
I support it. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 6 2013, 11:03 PM Post #5 |
|
Pull my finger!
![]()
|
They already made goats that could milk spiderweb-like material (which could be used for research purposes), and pigs that produce less phosphorus or something to keep them from polluting water sources and the like. |
![]() |
|
| CyborgIguana | Nov 6 2013, 11:17 PM Post #6 |
![]() ![]()
|
Really the only thing holding genetic engineering back is the complaints that we're "playing God". Even if God does exist, where is it said that he's against us doing these kinds of things? |
![]() |
|
| Sheather | Nov 7 2013, 12:01 AM Post #7 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
I'm all in favor, if it helps us feed more people and we do it safely. As far as the Glofish (they've created Glo-barbs, also, in addition to zebra danios and tetras), they're just pets, and while they don't much interest me I'm all in favor as the fish have no health issues. |
![]() |
|
| Hamikins | Nov 7 2013, 05:31 AM Post #8 |
![]()
You will respect my authoratah.
![]()
|
Sheather, isn't this the perfect time to be super cereal again?
|
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 7 2013, 05:44 AM Post #9 |
![]() ![]()
|
I would say that the ManBearPig post is bordering on being spam, I know it was trying to be humorous or whatnot. But I believe this was serious about whether you think scientists genetic engineering animals and plant-life is a good thing or not. I personally say no, because well, I'm a Christian. And second off, well, I'm not sure we know all of the possible ill side effects it might have. Just because the animals don't show negative health signs exactly means it's a proper thing to do to them just for amusement or what have you. For food purposes, it's a bit different since we need to find a way to keep up with the increasing demand but doing stuff like making glowing fish, dogs and cats and weird things...why? I'm sure doing this kind of engineering is expensive and your wasting it on...making fish glow for what, children to be fascinated with for what is all of five minutes before being bored with it. |
![]() |
|
| Hamikins | Nov 7 2013, 06:17 AM Post #10 |
![]()
You will respect my authoratah.
![]()
|
Did you read the page? The discussion there is the best. Well, I can see from that page how easily people can be fooled into thinking stuff is real, and it was on topic, and was only one post, so come on. Don't you want site activity? I won't post at all if I'm not allowed to be humorous all the time. There's only so much you can say on a topic anyway before the conversation goes round in circles so this is branching out. If ManBearPig thing was real I'd probably be out on the street rioting. . As long as the genetic engineering has a proper purpose, not just to make fish look pretty, and if it's regulated properly which it abominably isn't, I think it's OK. So there. ha. |
![]() |
|
| hananas59 | Nov 7 2013, 02:44 PM Post #11 |
![]()
Evolving creatures from earth.
![]()
|
Cloning of eliving animals : I support it but not that much cloning of extinct anials: We should keep our hadns off them even if we let them die, they would die eventually some time |
![]() |
|
| Sheather | Nov 7 2013, 04:38 PM Post #12 |
![]()
Thank you for the set, Azrael!
![]()
|
Glofish were only created once. They are now true genetically-modified organisms which produce glowing offspring, and are very cheap to produce now as danios are ready breeders, so it's not a ton of money. They also do not really glow except under black light; they merely have vibrant coloration due to the insertion of jellyfish and coral DNA. They have no health problems or anything and are just another novelty pet. I used to have a pair mixed with a shoal of wild-type danios and they lived just as long. And actually, the glowfish are only a saleable side-effect of important research, with the plan eventually being to create a fish which will develop the glow only in polluted water systems as a warning sign. I believe genetic engineering is the future; it will enable us to better feed our growing population, and I am all in favor of this. Now: cloning extinct animals? Honestly, a waste of money in my eyes, since animals cannot go back to the wild or anything, although I'm not actively opposed. A mammoth would be amazing to see, even just as a novelty living in a zoo with a herd of elephants. I just feel there are perhaps more important things we could devote our money to. |
![]() |
|
| Stephen | Nov 7 2013, 05:30 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Stuck on Earth
![]()
|
I think this is not the future. Diseases and pests adapt to these engineered crops. To give you an example: Corn A is genetically engineered. It's resistant to all kinds of pests and diseases. Yet, after X amount of years, a certain disease is immune for the defensive mechanisms of Corn A. It spreads over the whole earth and causes immense famines. I wouldn't bet on that, yes we might be able to notice the disease and make a cure before it has much effects, but how large are those chances? We haven't been able to develop a cure for AIDS, or cancer, or so many other diseases for decades. I also wouldn't bet on larger food supplies for a sustainable world. A larger population only means equal (at best) or more pollution. I would encourage smaller families and, to counter the poverty of elders, better pension regulation. And to add for that, large companies like Monsanto make effective use of these engineered crops. They develop seeds and sell those. Yet, unlike normal seeds, the seeds of the engineered crops are only useable for nourishment, whereas normally poor farmers could use a part of their harvest to sow again. So, poor farmers can't use these seeds and because their food is of lesser quality/quantity, they will sell less. I am not against those silly things like Glofish, I wouldn't find it responsible if they were released in the wild though. I agree with Sheather on the cloning of extinct animals. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 7 2013, 05:38 PM Post #14 |
![]()
|
I support the cloning & reintroduction of recently extinct animals,like the dodo. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Nov 7 2013, 05:58 PM Post #15 |
![]() ![]()
|
I honestly feel it would be amazing if we were to clone animals that went extinct, because let's face it, most of the recently extinct ones in the past century have been killed by us. It would be really neat to see Dodos in a zoo, and resurrecting them would work greatly to the advantage of the scientists studying them, obviously. There are some species I think we should try our hand at resurrecting, and some we should leave alone. For animals I think we should resurrect, Dodos, the passsenger pigeon, the elephant bird, most mammoths and mastodons, Smilodon, the quagga, and the thylacine are on the yes list, while the only main animals I think we shouldn't resurrect includes most dinosaurs, for several reasons, though if you need to have it explained in greater detail go watch Jurassic Park. As for genetic engineering, I'm for it, as long as the animals involved don't get any health problems. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Pets & Wildlife · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2

FAQ
Search
Members
Rules
Staff PM Box
Downloads
Pointies
Groups











Woooulllldd!
Woulllld! Woooooooouuuuuuullddddddddddddd!

. 


