The Instigator
brian_eggleston
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
Cerebral_Narcissist
Con (against)
Losing
17 Points

It should be legal to sell cytoplasmic hybrid animals to the general public

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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: 1/14/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 13,286 times Debate No: 10838
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (7)

 

brian_eggleston

Pro

Preamble:
-----------
According to the latest research, orang-utans, not chimpanzees, are human's closest relatives (1). This is good news for entrepreneurs wishing to crossbreed orang-utans and humans and even better news for their potential future customers.

That's because the latest advances in fertilisation and embryology techniques (2) have enabled the good people at Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises to start researching the possibility of producing admixed embryos developed from a combination of human and orang-utan eggs and DNA. Please read on to find out more…

Definitions:
------------
Cytoplasmic hybrids, or cybrids - made by placing the nucleus from a human cell into an animal egg that has had its nucleus removed, or visa-versa.

Oranghumans™ - hybrid creaturea that are the result implanting orang-utan DNA into human eggs and allowing the foetuses to develop to maturity inside the wombs of female orang-utans. These animals are bred more for strength and agility rather than intelligence and the ability to communicate, yet will be far smarter than any ape.

Here is a computer-generated image of what an Oranghuman™ could look like:
http://www.partymob.com...

Humanutans™ - hybrid creaturea that are the result implanting human DNA into orang-utan eggs and allowing the foetuses to develop to maturity inside the wombs of female humans. These animals are bred more for intelligence and the ability to communicate rather than strength and agility, yet will be far more athletic than any human.

Here is a computer-generated image of what an Humanutan™ could look like:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk...

Contention:
------------
Imagine how much better life would be if you owned one of Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises all new cytoplasmic hybrids. Think of all the advantages they could bring. If the law allows, it will soon be possible to choose between two breeds of cybrids: the more muscular Oranghuman™ and the more intelligent Humanutans™; both of which can be put to a variety of uses:

Pets – training your pet Humanutan™ is easy as he can communicate with you using basic English. So, in addition to having a loyal and affectionate pal around the house, you can also order him do the household chores, bring you a drink from the fridge, wash the car, mow the lawn or you could even send him round to your troublesome neighbour's house to throw bricks through his windows ("Nothing to do with me officer, yes, it could have been my ape but what are you going to do? Arrest it?")

Mercenary Soldiers – sending Oranghumans™ into battle is the ideal solution for private security firms charged with subduing insurgents in rogue states. These animals are supremely athletic and can be utilized in high risk activities such as mine clearance or flushing enemies out of their entrenchments and since they are not paid, they make more economic sense than employing humans even with high levels of fatalities.

Factory Workers – Fed up with trying to compete with cut-price products from China? Of course, there is no way you can produce your goods as cheaply as them due to the far higher labour costs in the West. But wait! Why not sack your menial staff and replace them with Oranghumans™ and Humanutans™? After all, it would make a lot of sense because beyond the initial purchase price, all you will have to spend is a few dollars a week per unit on food and shelter - even the Chinese can't compete with that!

Yes, the list of applications just goes on and on. Surely no government should deny its citizens the advantages of owning Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises' Oranghumans™ and Humanutans™ and for this reason I affirm that it should be legal to sell cytoplasmic hybrid animals to the general public.

Thank you.

(1) http://news.nationalgeographic.com...

(2) http://www.timesonline.co.uk...
Cerebral_Narcissist

Con

Thank you for posting this excellent debate. Though I must admit to having great sympathy for my opponents position, naturally desirous as I am of having a pet slave or indeed some form of ‘monkey butler' It is my position that opponents resolution would bring about more harm than good.

Objections to the Preamble
"That's because the latest advances in fertilisation and embryology techniques (2) have enabled the good people at Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises to start researching the possibility of producing admixed embryos developed from a combination of human and orang-utan eggs and DNA."

If one types ‘Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises' into the search engine one fails to find a company of that name.
http://www.bing.com...'s%20Ethical%20Enterprises&mkt=en-gb&FORM=TOOLBR&DI=2883&CE=14.0&CM=SearchWeb

Furthermore if one is to consult Companies House, which stores the name of all past and present companies in the UK one would fail to find a corresponding match.
http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk...

I therefore allege that there are no good people, or indeed bad nor indifferent people at Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises who are capable of such developments by reason of the fact that they either do not exist, and/or neither does the biotech firm for which they hypothetically work.

Objections to the Definitions

My opponent suggests and defines two commercial slave species.
"Oranghumans™ - hybrid creaturea that are the result implanting orang-utan DNA into human eggs and allowing the foetuses to develop to maturity inside the wombs of female orang-utans. These animals are bred more for strength and agility rather than intelligence and the ability to communicate, yet will be far smarter than any ape."

Humanutans™ - hybrid creaturea that are the result implanting human DNA into orang-utan eggs and allowing the foetuses to develop to maturity inside the wombs of female humans. These animals are bred more for intelligence and the ability to communicate rather than strength and agility, yet will be far more athletic than any human."

My objection is that according to my opponents own link,
"The admixed embryos created by the Newcastle group are of a kind known as cytoplasmic hybrids, or cybrids, which are made by placing the nucleus from a human cell into an animal egg that has had its nucleus removed. The genetic material in the resulting embryos is 99.9 per cent human."

Therefore Oranghumans will be 99.9% orangutan.
Humanutans will be 99.9% human.

I therefore argue that the potential benefits if such 'hybrids' are greatly exaggerated. As they will essentially still be humans or Orang-utans.

Incidentally I do not believe that these terms have been trademarked.

My opponent claims that,
"Here is a computer-generated image of what an Oranghuman™ could look like:"
http://www.partymob.com......

However this is actually the bear character originally from the popular British television comedy series ‘Bo selecta'. Popular for his vulgar ways and spontaneous erections and of course ultimately a human actor.
http://www.youtube.com...

My opponent further claims that,
"Here is a computer-generated image of what an Humanutan™ could look like:"
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk......

However this is simply a rather hirsute and (then) horizontally triumphant darts player by the name Andy Fordham, or the ‘Viking‘. I shall concede that his beard does not seem to follow normal human growth patterns however I observe no conclusive evidence that he is a human/ape hybrid.
http://www.bing.com...#

With these corrections I shall now address my opponents contentions.

"Imagine how much better life would be if you owned one of Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises all new cytoplasmic hybrids. Think of all the advantages they could bring. If the law allows, it will soon be possible to choose between two breeds of cybrids: the more muscular Oranghuman™ and the more intelligent Humanutans™; both of which can be put to a variety of uses:"

In practical reality I would have purchased either an Orang-utan or a human. Though the ‘Orang-utan' would likely be marginally more intelligent and human looking than an average Orang-utan it would still be 99.9% an Orang-utan. It would likely eat all my food, defecate around the house, fail to take phone messages and crush me as I sit on the sofa watching TV.

The ‘human' would likely be strange looking. marginally less intelligent, stronger but clumsier as it may not be fully bipedal. At best sharing a home with such a creature would bring back warm memories of student days, at worst it would be awkward.
http://www.buzzincelebritygossip.co.uk...

"Pets – training your pet Humanutan™ is easy as he can communicate with you using basic English. So, in addition to having a loyal and affectionate pal around the house, you can also order him do the household chores, bring you a drink from the fridge, wash the car, mow the lawn or you could even send him round to your troublesome neighbour's house to throw bricks through his windows"

Being 99.9% human he is equally likely to sleep with my significant other, or urinate in my coffee. Also training such an ‘intelligent' being will require a great deal of cruelty which will likely cause him to crush me at some point with his fairly human but surprisingly hairy arms.

My opponent also claims that.
"Mercenary Soldiers – sending Oranghumans™ into battle is the ideal solution for private security firms charged with subduing insurgents in rogue states."

Modern Armies, with the precision of modern technology often fail to minimise civilian casualties or successfully identify friend from foe. Assuming that Oranghumans can be trained to use a gun, logic still suggests that they would consistently fail to coordinate themselves in the field.

My opponent argues that,
"Factory Workers – Fed up with trying to compete with cut-price products from China? Of course, there is no way you can produce your goods as cheaply as them due to the far higher labour costs in the West. But wait! Why not sack your menial staff and replace them with Oranghumans™ and Humanutans™?"

This would however create massive unemployment and all the resulting social ills that would bring as well as a 'racist' backlash. In addition for previously mentioned reasons the Oranghumans would simply sit, waddle, eat and defecate. Though cheaper than ordinary humans you do not generally have to outfit a human workforce with nappies. The Humanutans would be too intelligent, and would either revolt… or suffer from progressive lower work rates as they begin to talk about football, sex and how bad life is… the three main topics of conversation for any blue collar worker.

In addition, escaped, lost, abandoned hybrids would be impossible to distinguish from the many chavs that currently roam our streets.
http://cornerstonegroup.files.wordpress.com...

Current misguided liberal thinking holds that chavs are somehow human therefore their lives, litters and drug habits to be paid for by the state. Should the hybrid population merge with the chav underclass a potentially catastrophic burden will be placed upon society.

It is also a known fact that any attempt to blur the lines between Human and Ape or upgrade lesser hominids/primates will result in the destruction of mankind's hegemony over earth, to be followed by the further insult of a poor remake.
http://moviesmedia.ign.com...

Not to mention awkward and disturbing interracial relationships
http://www.pollsb.com...

It is for these reasons I negate the resolution.
Debate Round No. 1
brian_eggleston

Pro

Ha! Ha! Your reply was hilarious but it also absolutely stumped me. I've thought about a few responses but it's too late to write now so I'll reply tomorrow...
Cerebral_Narcissist

Con

Due to my shining brilliance, distracted thoughts of simian slavery or an imbalance of the humours my good opponent has accidentally messed up his round 2, so we will ignore it, skip to round three and consider it a two round debate!
Debate Round No. 2
brian_eggleston

Pro

With many thanks to C_N for accepting this debate and also for being so understanding about my incompetence in R2, I should like to inform the readers that, sadly, Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises is subject to threats, intimidation and possible terrorist attacks from Catholic fundamentalists who are opposed to our research. For example, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the head of the Catholic Church in Scotland, chillingling described the type of work we are engaged in as "experiments of Frankenstein proportions". (1)

For this reason Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises is now based out of a top secret loboratory in North Korea and here is a satelite image of the facility in order to prove it actually exists:

http://maps.google.co.uk...

It is our need for absolute secrecy, by the way, that is the reason Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises doesn't show up on Western search engines. However, if you go to the state-run North Korean search engine: http://www.dprksearch.net... and type in "Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises top secret laboratory located 5km northeast of Kil-Ju" using Korean characters you will find more relevant results (I would give you more details but, unfortunately, this site doesn't support Korean characters).

Also, I should like to say point out that our employees are, indeed good people, and in the case of young research assistants like Tatiana, very good indeed.

http://i.zdnet.com...
Tatiana setting up a top secret experiment at Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises secret lab yesterday

Regarding my opponent's suggestion that these hybrids would be almost indistinguishable from humans or orang-utans, I'm afraid I must contradict him. Although it is true they would be either 99.9% orang-utan or human, that 0.1% makes all the difference. After all, chimpanzees share 99.4% of their DNA with humans (2) but you would agree, I'm sure, that chimps shouldn't be afforded human rights.

And anyway, anything that isn't 100% human isn't human at all. "Human-like", perhaps. I mean, you can't sell cartons of "Pure Orange Juice" unless it contains 100% orange juice. Even if only 0.1% of it is rainwater and spit, it still has to be called "Orange Flavour Drink".

Incedentally, both Oranghuman™ and Humanutan™ are trademarks: unregistered trademarks. Registered trademarks use the symbol � rather than ™. (3)

Now to defend my contentions regarding the possible uses of these animals:

It is true that, initially, the introdcution of cybrids into the workplace will create some unemployment. However, manufacturing industries in the West have been in gradual decline for years because they cannot compete with the low wage economies of countries like India and China. These people need to be re-trained to do skilled jobs. Otherwise they could become comedians like Bobby Ball (out of Cannon and Ball) and Ed Large (out of Little and Large), both of whom were thrown onto the scrapheap when Margaret "the milk-snatcher" Thatcher closed down all the heavy industries up North.

Furthermore, I don't accept that these cybrids will be inherently badly-behaved as my opponent suggests. Take the example of sheepdogs: they are very obedient and well behaved and they perform very complex tasks and they are less intelligent even than Oranghumans™.

I do accept, however, that Humanutans™ might be mistaken for chavs, but surely this is a good thing? As chavs don't usually have jobs and just sponge off the dole instead, if they were rounded up by pest control officers who mistook them for cybrids and were then either sold off to the highest bidder or put down, the taxpayer would save a fortune in unemployment and housing benefits and we would also rid the streets of unruly yobs.

It is an interesting thought that cybrids and humans could interbreed, though, and that this could result in a Planet of the Apes type scenario. Did you know, by the way, that Helena Bonham Carter had to spend six hours in make-up prior to each shoot in that film?

http://img5.allocine.fr...
Helena Bonham Carter playing one of the monkeys in Planet of the Apes

What a ridiculous waste of time and money! If I were in charge of casting for that film I would have hired that woman that plays Gail out of Coronation Street because she wouldn't have needed any make-up at all!

http://corrie.emmerdale.org...
That woman that plays Gail out of Coronation Street

However, I doubt this nightmare scenario would ever materialise. After all, this type of sexual deviancy is rife in Norfolk (a rural English county stereotypically associated with inbreeding) yet the result is merely a mentally-challenged population most of whom are incapable of taking care of themselves much less taking over the world! (Did you know, by the way, that the medical slang term "NFN" to mean idiotic comes from "Normal For Norfolk"? (4))

Overall, I think my opponent has raised some valid concerns over cybrids potential shortcomings and I would have to concede that they would not be for everybody. Some people own dogs and fail to look after them properly: they don't feed or walk them enough and instead of training them they are violent with them when they misbehave. The result of this is a dog that is viscous and a danger to children and I suppose the same could happen with cybrids if they fell into the wrong hands.

However, in the hands of caring and responsible owners Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises Oranghumans™ and Humanutans™ would make fine pets, mercenaries or manual workers.

Thank you.

(1) http://www.timesonline.co.uk...
(2) http://news.bbc.co.uk...
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org...
(4) http://en.wikipedia.org...
Cerebral_Narcissist

Con

Though I must thank my opponent for his obliging links I am not able to confirm or deny his claims that Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises is based in North Korea. However I would caution readers that my opponent is by his own admission the MD of a travel firm that is ‘quite small'. (See the comments section of his profile).*

*This is in no way a personal attack as it greatly outshines what I do as a living.

This raises certain issues for me,
1: Would he be able to raise the capital to establish a cutting edge biological lab in North Korea?
2: It is inevitable that Brian Eggleston would seek to ‘synergise' the various branches of his financial empire, thus leading to the employment of Human/Orang-utan hybrid airline pilots with obvious risk to the public.
3: The kudos, and potentially much of the profit involved from the development and marketing of these hybrids will go to North Korea, a brutal repressive dictatorship.
4: Such hybrid slaves may very well act as spies and fifth columnists for evil communist overlords.
5: Users may be forced to learn Korean to issue commands to their creatures.

Thus, in the defence of western capitalism I must urge a CON vote.

I am however gratified to see that Tatiana, should she be employed by "Eggleston's Ethical Enterprises" is conscientious of current health and safety recommendations concerning the dangers of over-heating in the workplace.

"Regarding my opponent's suggestion that these hybrids would be almost indistinguishable from humans or orang-utans, I'm afraid I must contradict him. Although it is true they would be either 99.9% orang-utan or human, that 0.1% makes all the difference. After all, chimpanzees share 99.4% of their DNA with humans (2) but you would agree, I'm sure, that chimps shouldn't be afforded human rights."

Though I was unaware of the figure of a 99.4% similarity with human DNA as the figure is revised constantly, there is an argument that Chimps should be accorded a far greater level of rights or protection due to their previously underestimated levels of intelligence.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk...

My opponent argues that those made unemployed by the introduction of cybrids could be "re-trained to do skilled jobs. Otherwise they could become comedians like Bobby Ball (out of Cannon and Ball) and Ed Large (out of Little and Large), both of whom were thrown onto the scrapheap when Margaret "the milk-snatcher" Thatcher closed down all the heavy industries up North."

However not everyone is mentally, or psychologically capable of being retrained for skilled jobs, not everyone is able to access such training. Even if the Government puts aside money for this role it will likely be embezzled by a new labour apparatchik. Additionally not everyone has the comedy genius of Bobby Ball and Ed Large, such giants are few and far between.

My opponent argues that,
"I do accept, however, that Humanutans™ might be mistaken for chavs, but surely this is a good thing? As chavs don't usually have jobs and just sponge off the dole instead, if they were rounded up by pest control officers who mistook them for cybrids and were then either sold off to the highest bidder or put down, the taxpayer would save a fortune in unemployment and housing benefits and we would also rid the streets of unruly yobs."

This however is not a valid rebuttal, as the introduction of cybrids would not in itself cause the Government to take such wise, humane and utilitarian steps. It is far more likely that chavs, and hybrids mistaken for chavs will be indulged until the collapse of civilisation. At which point the hybrids will take control of the shattered world.
http://daddytypes.com...

My opponent considers the dangers of interbreeding by saying,
"However, I doubt this nightmare scenario would ever materialise. After all, this type of sexual deviancy is rife in Norfolk (a rural English county stereotypically associated with inbreeding) yet the result is merely a mentally-challenged population most of whom are incapable of taking care of themselves much less taking over the world! (Did you know, by the way, that the medical slang term "NFN" to mean idiotic comes from "Normal For Norfolk"? (4))"

Is my opponent willing to take the risk that his wife or daughter may somehow produce a creature such as this,
http://www.worldoflongmire.com...

I believe that the good Cardinal Keith O'Brien has it right, and I urge people to vote CON in defence of the human race and civilisation!
Debate Round No. 3
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
"you don't have to feed robots"

But you do have to build and maintain them. Humans build and maintain themselves. Food and energy costs are essentially the same, so humans are cheaper in the long run, at the moment.
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
Cheers!
Posted by Cerebral_Narcissist 7 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
Okay, we will scratch round two and just jump to three!
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
I've just realised, this will not give you time to respond so I should forfeit R2 and you can write anything you like and I will have just one more round.
Posted by Cerebral_Narcissist 7 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
(I mean my round 2)
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
Okay, I'll do that.

Thanks!
Posted by Cerebral_Narcissist 7 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
I tell you what, post your round two in the comments section, and I'll reply to that in my round 3. You may have to split it up as the comments allow only 2,000 characters as a pop.
Posted by Cerebral_Narcissist 7 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
d'oh!

Is there anyway to delete your post for round two? If we report it might the admin guy oblige?

If not then we will just have to skip that round and go to round three!
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
Sorry C_N, I posted my comment in the argument section by mistake...I've got my arguments half written...my mistake of course, sorry about that, but I'll post them in the next round. Really sorry for that.
Posted by Cerebral_Narcissist 7 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
Yea sorry about that!

What it is, I tend to avoid your debates because because they are clever and funny and though I can entertain I am basically a boring pompous fool. This debate is serious enough for me to give it a shot however!
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
brian_egglestonCerebral_NarcissistTied
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 Atheism 6 years ago
Atheism
brian_egglestonCerebral_NarcissistTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Yvette 6 years ago
Yvette
brian_egglestonCerebral_NarcissistTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Grape 7 years ago
Grape
brian_egglestonCerebral_NarcissistTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:51 
Vote Placed by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
brian_egglestonCerebral_NarcissistTied
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 Demauscian 7 years ago
Demauscian
brian_egglestonCerebral_NarcissistTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 7 years ago
Ore_Ele
brian_egglestonCerebral_NarcissistTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:22