The Instigator
Whitefuz
Con (against)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
Maya9
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points

Cloning animals and people

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/22/2008 Category: Technology
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,459 times Debate No: 4758
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (8)

 

Whitefuz

Con

I do not think that the cloning of animals is a good thing that scientists should work into. I think that cloning an animal would not be a good thing to do. I say this because first of all there are hundreds, yes hundreds of failures before 1 single success will happen.
Another thing to be noted is when it comes to age, it has been verified that because of the genetic material that will be placed into the new "host" will cause the new creation to be "older than itself". Betsy, one of the first cloned animals died at age six, but genetically was twelve years old. It came down with arthritis and lung disease, its death factor. Lung disease is common in sheep at their older stages. With this information its easy to state that when you clone an animal or person, their life expectancy will not be as high as normal.
When it comes to cloning humans, there will be alot of wasted embryos. There will be alot of dead failures. And so what if we find out how to clone a human. Sexual reproduction is easier, more efficient, and does not risk nearly as many lives as cloning does. And lets say we did clone a human, now what? Now we can use their organs for our personnel use? How can we justify ourselves for creating and killing to further our own life expectancy? I finish in saying i do not think cloning of animals/humans is a good thing to do.
Maya9

Pro

"I say this because first of all there are hundreds, yes hundreds of failures before 1 single success will happen."

Umm... right. Obviously, you've never tried to get a woman pregnant. Conception is considered MOST likely within the first month of "trying", with only a %30 conception rate. The rate falls steadily after that. (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov...) Furthermore, the mortality of sperm post-ejaculation is extremely high. The vast majority of sperm never make it to the egg.

"Another thing to be noted is when it comes to age, it has been verified that because of the genetic material that will be placed into the new "host" will cause the new creation to be "older than itself". Betsy, one of the first cloned animals died at age six, but genetically was twelve years old. It came down with arthritis and lung disease, its death factor. Lung disease is common in sheep at their older stages. With this information its easy to state that when you clone an animal or person, their life expectancy will not be as high as normal."

This is a fixable problem, and therefore a moot point.

"Sexual reproduction is easier, more efficient, and does not risk nearly as many lives as cloning does."

As I have pointed out, it is certainly not more efficient. It is easier and less time consuming, but sexual reproduction and cloning don't necessarily serve the same ends. Cloning is being pursued largely in the interest of medicine to improve human lifespan, not to create more humans.

"Now we can use their organs for our personnel use?"

Cells from cloned embryos could be used to grow organs in an artificial environment. Growing them in a human body and killing said human is not necessary.

I want to post my arguments for why cloning is a GOOD thing, but I'm running out of time. I'll save that for my next turn.
Debate Round No. 1
Whitefuz

Con

Whitefuz forfeited this round.
Maya9

Pro

Why is it that people start these debates when they can't finish them? Weren't these people ever taught that it is rude to waste the time of others?
Debate Round No. 2
Whitefuz

Con

Whitefuz forfeited this round.
Maya9

Pro

Okay. Well, I guess I win. Since my opponent has missed two rounds in a row, I'm not even going to bother continuing to post. It is pretty clear who won.
Debate Round No. 3
Whitefuz

Con

Whitefuz forfeited this round.
Maya9

Pro

Maya9 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Whitefuz

Con

Whitefuz forfeited this round.
Maya9

Pro

Maya9 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by mjoveny 8 years ago
mjoveny
Cloning HUMANS is EVIL

how could anyone say it isnt
Posted by Zerosmelt 8 years ago
Zerosmelt
That should have read *young*
Posted by Zerosmelt 8 years ago
Zerosmelt
whitefuz if you were refering to the sheep, Dolly, there is no definitive evidence as to why she died you. Many believed it was her lifestyle. As a celebraty, she was constantly being moved around, visited, show-cased, and monitored.
Posted by Chaos_Evolved 8 years ago
Chaos_Evolved
Good job Maya9, nicely done, even though there wasn't much contest lol.
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
If you're saying that a million sperm is "one shot", then I might as well say a hundred embryos is "one experiment". Thankfully, things don't work that way. As for the rarity argument, I never claimed that it was "rare" for a child to come out of sexual reproduction, I just proved it was inefficient.

I.E. "1 out of a few million" as a success rate.
Posted by Whitefuz 8 years ago
Whitefuz
The thing is you might waste more sperm but you still get it in one shot. And if making a child was so rare why are there so many? Also men reproduce sperm at a fast rate, so you could just try the next day.
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
"Sexual reproduction is easier, more efficient, and does not risk nearly as many lives as cloning does."

I call bullsh*t.

Do you realize how many other sperm you beat out to reach that egg, Whitefuz? No? Well I'll tell you. It was probably somewhere in the millions, yes millions of failures, and "million" is bigger than "hundred" by four zeros.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by mjoveny 8 years ago
mjoveny
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Zerosmelt 8 years ago
Zerosmelt
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Katie01 8 years ago
Katie01
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by GaryBacon 8 years ago
GaryBacon
WhitefuzMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30