But is CLONING part of evolution!!!!!!?

Question

I aksed a question 5mins ago asking if it was ok to clone animlas like dolly the sheep and horses.

some people said yes its ok - its progress, evolution.

BUt I ask is 'progress' always good? and beneficial or even the right path for evolutuion to take. Evolution specifically is about animals surviving against nature. Should we play God? Will it benefit us or anything to do so?

me thinks not.

thats a good point sa17 some species do use cloning in their reproduction progression. However we don't and neither do sheep or horses. Also baterium have the potential for mutation (which is key to survival) but artificial cloning doesn't have mutation.

Answer 1

Cloning is not a part of evolution. it is an intervention with nature to stop evolution and restain a certain genetic makeup for generations. This will actually prevent evolutionary change rather than bringing evolution. whoever said it is progress did not complete his high school properly.

Answer 2

Evolution is a process that effects an entire population of over time! It may take as little as a couple of generations to several millenia before noticable differences occur - BUT it affects the entire population. An example would be Giraffes. Over time those with taller necks got the best food - but the tallest trees lost the fewest leaves - and overtime taller trees and horselike animals with taller necks evolved into present day giraffes. The short-necked segment of the population, and shorter trees either died out, or evolved differently and formed a new population.

With few exceptions, cloning is not part of evolution - because it merely preserves 1 to a few individual animals (like Dolly the sheep). Sure, one could create a large herd based on the original Dolly donor, but their genetic makeup is based on the orginal, and therefore have been removed from natural selection. The only thing that evolves in this case, is our science.

The exception I mentioned, there are some animals that reproduce without the male of the species. At least one species of fish, I'm sorry the name eludes me at the moment, is entirely female. In this case, the entire population clones itself - but there is still enough genetic diversity, and ongoing random mutation to ensure the evolutionary process continues.

Answer 3

I think evolution is more of a natural process.

And of course progress isn't always good, most mutations made to a species during evolutionary proces are not good changes and do not help the species and may even hurt the species (neutral and negative mutations) , but that's natural.

I would look at cloning as a seperate entity all together from evolution, and 'playing god', if you will.

We have learned quite a bit from cloning, about it's flaws, about embryonic pre and post development, about cells and tissues, etc.... In the future I don't think we will be cloning as much for reproductive benefits (i.e. creating sheeps and horses) but more for ES cells to treat various diseases.

Answer 4

Well, we breed animals to produce more milk, wool, meat, eggs, etc. This isn't cloning, but it is genetic manipulation - its bending evolution to yield a more productive animal. High-yielding animals are bred and lower-yielding animals don't. The result isn't the fittest animal, but the animal that suits the farmer's needs.

You could say that this is playing god because we're altering these animals, but let's be honest - these animals are domesticated, which prevents natural selection from happening. If you look at old pictures from the renessance, there are paintings of pigs that don't resemble their modern counterparts at all.

Is this genetic manipulation a good thing? It depends. If you think it's good that we have animals that are producing more, then yes. If you think that changing characteristics of an animal just to make it taste better is wrong, then no. If you don't dilute the gene pool of a particular breed to much, an animal species won't be in danger of dieing off due to genetic manipulation.

Answer 5

I don't know why people get so excited about
cloning. Even it sometime becomes possible to
clone humans artificially it won't produce a duplicate of another person. The clone will be like
the original genetically, but will be an independent person. In
any case identical twins, triplets, etc ARE clones
and they are obviously different people.

Answer 6

Cloning is a natural evolutionary process that the most prolific organism on earth uses as a means to replicate - ie - bacteria and other micro-organisms use binary fission to replicate and its essentially cloning, except on the occasions where they utilise transposition.

Answer 7

It is Revolution.Long term effects of cloning is uncertain.It may be possible to create monsters.Instead of present day weapons they may be used in warfare.It may lead to total destruction of presently known ecological balance.It is dangerous to meddle with nature.Man has used science only to kill man,rather than saving.See Nuclear power,it has killed more than giving life to people.If you see the past record of mankind and utlisation of scientific knowledge,cloning is not desirable.

Answer 8

looks like it

Answer 9

it has become part of evelution.........Its not playing God because its science.......