• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

First Clone-to-Order Pet Sold

gopunk

Lifer
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c...002128444_kitty23.html

SAN FRANCISCO ? The first cloned-to-order pet sold in the United States is named Little Nicky, a 9-week-old kitten delivered to a Texas woman saddened by the loss of a cat she had owned for 17 years.

The Maine my excellent compatriot kitten cost its owner $50,000 and was cloned from a beloved cat, named Nicky, that died last year. Nicky's owner banked the cat's DNA, which was used to create the clone.

"He is identical. His personality is the same," said the woman, named Julie. She asked to be identified by her first name only, because she said she fears being targeted by groups opposed to cloning.

"When Little Nicky yawned, I even saw two spots inside his mouth, just like Nicky had," Julie said. "Little Nicky loves water like Nicky did, and he's already jumped into the bathtub like Nicky used to do."

Yet while Little Nicky, who was delivered two weeks ago, frolics in his new home, the kitten's creation and sale have reignited fierce ethical and scientific debate over cloning technology, which is rapidly advancing.

The company that created Little Nicky is Sausalito, Calif.-based Genetic Savings & Clone.

Despite its whimsical name, the company has been working for more than four years on the cat cloning process. The founder of the company, Arizona billionaire John Sperling, funded the research at Texas A&M University that led to the cloning of the first cat in 2001, CC, or Carbon Copy.

The company hopes by May to have produced the world's first cloned dog, which it believes will be a much more lucrative market than cats.


i don't really have anything against it ethically, but i think she should have just gotten a new cat. i understand loving pets, but i'm not sure it's emotionally healthy to deal with loss this way.
 
$50,000 for a GD cat!!! LMAO. You can get then free at any shelter. People care more about thier animals than other people.:thumbsdown: Even forming sick emotional relations with them instead of thier own kind. Ya eithiclly wrong and emotionally wrong but not for the reasons you and the authors discribe/

I'm a pet owner myself but no animal is worth that.
 
I don't have a problem with it either, but $50K, that's just fVcking stupid! I also think a shelter is a MUCH better place to get a pet.
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
$50,000 for a GD cat!!! LMAO. You can get then free at any shelter. People care more about thier animals than other people.:thumbsdown: Even forming sick emotional relations with them instead of thier own kind. Ya eithiclly wrong and emotionally wrong but not for the reasons you and the authors discribe/

I'm a pet owner myself but no animal is worth that.

what's wrong with caring about other animals more than people? that's their own choice... they are not obligated to help humans.
 
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Zebo
$50,000 for a GD cat!!! LMAO. You can get then free at any shelter. People care more about thier animals than other people.:thumbsdown: Even forming sick emotional relations with them instead of thier own kind. Ya eithiclly wrong and emotionally wrong but not for the reasons you and the authors discribe/

I'm a pet owner myself but no animal is worth that.

what's wrong with caring about other animals more than people? that's their own choice... they are not obligated to help humans.

Cuase we're number one on the food chain? Cause animals are tools? Cause animals only care about you cause you feed them then with a cat even thats suspect? Cause we should take care of our own first?

 
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: gopunk
what's wrong with caring about other animals more than people? that's their own choice... they are not obligated to help humans.

Cuase we're number one on the food chain?

what relevance does that have?

Cause animals are tools?

why can't we care about tools more than other people? humans can be tools too btw.

Cause animals only care about you cause you feed them then with a cat even thats suspect?

are humans any better? nobody is in a relationship that they're not getting anything out of.

Cause we should take care of our own first?

why, because the human species is in danger of extinction?
 
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: digiram
Originally posted by: sandorski
that's creepy.

I second that!!!

reminds me of pet cemetary, scary!!!!!. I couldn't live with a cloned anything.

Hehe, yup. I was thinking Stephen King as I read it. 😀

I know I wouldn't be getting much sleep in the same house as that animal.
 
Originally posted by: PizzaYummy
I look forward to the day when we can clone very sexy women to keep as sex slaves.

I'd buy that for $50,000😀 Remove vocal cords though from the DNA 😀 j/k
 
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: gopunk
what's wrong with caring about other animals more than people? that's their own choice... they are not obligated to help humans.

Cuase we're number one on the food chain?

what relevance does that have?

Cause animals are tools?

why can't we care about tools more than other people? humans can be tools too btw.

Cause animals only care about you cause you feed them then with a cat even thats suspect?

are humans any better? nobody is in a relationship that they're not getting anything out of.

Cause we should take care of our own first?

why, because the human species is in danger of extinction?

Hypothetical with caveat. No Deux Ex Machina comes to the rescue.

You have a child and a kitten in the street about to be run over by a truck. The owners of the cat and the parents of the child are unable (for whatever reason ) to reach them in time, but are yelling for help. Only you can do it. You can save one.

Your choices.

1} Save the child
2} Save the kitten
3) You either don't care or am unable to choose between them so you decide to let both die.


There are no other choices in this scenario.

So, which is it?



1) Save the child
2) Sa

 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: gopunk
what's wrong with caring about other animals more than people? that's their own choice... they are not obligated to help humans.

Cuase we're number one on the food chain?

what relevance does that have?

Cause animals are tools?

why can't we care about tools more than other people? humans can be tools too btw.

Cause animals only care about you cause you feed them then with a cat even thats suspect?

are humans any better? nobody is in a relationship that they're not getting anything out of.

Cause we should take care of our own first?

why, because the human species is in danger of extinction?

Hypothetical with caveat. No Deux Ex Machina comes to the rescue.

You have a child and a kitten in the street about to be run over by a truck. The owners of the cat and the parents of the child are unable (for whatever reason ) to reach them in time, but are yelling for help. Only you can do it. You can save one.

Your choices.

1} Save the child
2} Save the kitten
3) You either don't care or am unable to choose between them so you decide to let both die.


There are no other choices in this scenario.

So, which is it?



1) Save the child
2) Sa

probably the child, i hate cats

now, if it was my dog in the street? that's a different story.
 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: gopunk
what's wrong with caring about other animals more than people? that's their own choice... they are not obligated to help humans.

Cuase we're number one on the food chain?

what relevance does that have?

Cause animals are tools?

why can't we care about tools more than other people? humans can be tools too btw.

Cause animals only care about you cause you feed them then with a cat even thats suspect?

are humans any better? nobody is in a relationship that they're not getting anything out of.

Cause we should take care of our own first?

why, because the human species is in danger of extinction?

Hypothetical with caveat. No Deux Ex Machina comes to the rescue.

You have a child and a kitten in the street about to be run over by a truck. The owners of the cat and the parents of the child are unable (for whatever reason ) to reach them in time, but are yelling for help. Only you can do it. You can save one.

Your choices.

1} Save the child
2} Save the kitten
3) You either don't care or am unable to choose between them so you decide to let both die.


There are no other choices in this scenario.

So, which is it?



1) Save the child
2) Sa

We value human life above all other life... that is, white christians, them there musulems are animals anywayz.

I have a good story about a cow, a hindu, a muslim and a christian but it would probably get me banned. hehe.
 
Originally posted by: gopunk
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c...002128444_kitty23.html

SAN FRANCISCO ? The first cloned-to-order pet sold in the United States is named Little Nicky, a 9-week-old kitten delivered to a Texas woman saddened by the loss of a cat she had owned for 17 years.

The Maine my excellent compatriot kitten cost its owner $50,000 and was cloned from a beloved cat, named Nicky, that died last year. Nicky's owner banked the cat's DNA, which was used to create the clone.

"He is identical. His personality is the same," said the woman, named Julie. She asked to be identified by her first name only, because she said she fears being targeted by groups opposed to cloning.

"When Little Nicky yawned, I even saw two spots inside his mouth, just like Nicky had," Julie said. "Little Nicky loves water like Nicky did, and he's already jumped into the bathtub like Nicky used to do."

Yet while Little Nicky, who was delivered two weeks ago, frolics in his new home, the kitten's creation and sale have reignited fierce ethical and scientific debate over cloning technology, which is rapidly advancing.

The company that created Little Nicky is Sausalito, Calif.-based Genetic Savings & Clone.

Despite its whimsical name, the company has been working for more than four years on the cat cloning process. The founder of the company, Arizona billionaire John Sperling, funded the research at Texas A&M University that led to the cloning of the first cat in 2001, CC, or Carbon Copy.

The company hopes by May to have produced the world's first cloned dog, which it believes will be a much more lucrative market than cats.


i don't really have anything against it ethically, but i think she should have just gotten a new cat. i understand loving pets, but i'm not sure it's emotionally healthy to deal with loss this way.

Not to mention expensive! Shiiiiiit, that's a buttload of cash for a damn cat, especially when you see them being *given away* in front of grocery stores *constantly* 🙂

Jason
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: Zebo
$50,000 for a GD cat!!! LMAO. You can get then free at any shelter. People care more about thier animals than other people.:thumbsdown: Even forming sick emotional relations with them instead of thier own kind. Ya eithiclly wrong and emotionally wrong but not for the reasons you and the authors discribe/

I'm a pet owner myself but no animal is worth that.

what's wrong with caring about other animals more than people? that's their own choice... they are not obligated to help humans.

Cuase we're number one on the food chain? Cause animals are tools? Cause animals only care about you cause you feed them then with a cat even thats suspect? Cause we should take care of our own first?

While I do understand and agree with your sentiment, the bottom line is that it was her money, and she alone has the right to decide what to do with it.

Jason
 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Hypothetical with caveat. No Deux Ex Machina comes to the rescue.

You have a child and a kitten in the street about to be run over by a truck. The owners of the cat and the parents of the child are unable (for whatever reason ) to reach them in time, but are yelling for help. Only you can do it. You can save one.

Your choices.

1} Save the child
2} Save the kitten
3) You either don't care or am unable to choose between them so you decide to let both die.


There are no other choices in this scenario.

So, which is it?



1) Save the child
2) Sa

Hypothetical situation = "Let's created a tightly controlled, impossible scenario so we can get only a couple of possible outcomes, for which we can prepare canned, assanine arguments to make someone look like a total prick!"

Jason
 
Back
Top