This is nothing new or fake. There is no need to use the word “claim” like you think he is lying. I personally have a friend who spent like $50,000 or $100,000 to clone one of her dogs… twice.
I guarantee he has more money than she does (though she is ridiculously wealthy), so I have no doubts he did something that rich people have been doing for a decade.
EDIT: Yes, I know that is ESPN’s headline, not OPs.
I remember all the headlines about cloning “Dolly the sheep” years ago, then that was it. Discussion of the tech in the mainstream stopped. So I always assumed that at that point there were sketchy human trials ongoing and its just not advertised.
Yep, it’s the “probably” that creates the ethics conundrum. We won’t know how to improve the process without testing the process, and we cannot ethically create “test” humans like that scene in Alien Resurrection where all the failed Sigourney clones are sitting in jars, suffering and begging for death.
This is nothing new or fake. There is no need to use the word “claim” like you think he is lying. I personally have a friend who spent like $50,000 or $100,000 to clone one of her dogs… twice.
I guarantee he has more money than she does (though she is ridiculously wealthy), so I have no doubts he did something that rich people have been doing for a decade.
EDIT: Yes, I know that is ESPN’s headline, not OPs.
Did not know that. How far are we from cloning humans? xD
I remember all the headlines about cloning “Dolly the sheep” years ago, then that was it. Discussion of the tech in the mainstream stopped. So I always assumed that at that point there were sketchy human trials ongoing and its just not advertised.
We could probably do it now ethics aside
Yep, it’s the “probably” that creates the ethics conundrum. We won’t know how to improve the process without testing the process, and we cannot ethically create “test” humans like that scene in Alien Resurrection where all the failed Sigourney clones are sitting in jars, suffering and begging for death.