- 16,532
- 4,206
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2015
Funny thing is if someone tells Bob something and he believes it, he's not a sheep. If we believe someone who tells us the opposite we're sheep. Ha ha ha
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Funny thing is if someone tells Bob something and he believes it, he's not a sheep. If we believe someone who tells us the opposite we're sheep. Ha ha ha
No, no, no. I'm not saying a scientist should debunk cloning. I'm saying somebody should step in and debunk his cloning conspiracy theory. We all know cloning is possible, is being done to an extent, and researched but it's far from perfect.So a new scientist should step in and debunk his cloning conspiracy?
Most modern scientists agree that cloning is entirely possible, just highly unethical.
History has taught us that ethics have never kept people from experienting on others.
If you keep using the dna from the cloned successors does the quality of the clones decline?
Like are the retro + clones of lesser quality than the og clones?
is there a grey market clone of ninjahood somewhere out there?If you keep using the dna from the cloned successors does the quality of the clones decline?
Like are the retro + clones of lesser quality than the og clones?
If you're not interested and not keeping an eye on it's progress makes no sense to create such suspicion in your head when you're relying on the media to tell you what the scientists have been announcing.Im not gon front like I can imagine where they at with cloning. I know I just found it odd in 96' they were dumb hype to announce they cloned sheep. And then, everything been all sshhhhhh......... ever since. Doubt they will ever bring it up again besides talking bout some menial use or that they are still developing the science.
Don't see how I can keep progress on something like this. Labs can be transparent as they want to be and scientists publish what they want.If you're not interested and not keeping an eye on it's progress makes no sense to create such suspicion in your head when you're relying on the media to tell you what the scientists have been announcing.Im not gon front like I can imagine where they at with cloning. I know I just found it odd in 96' they were dumb hype to announce they cloned sheep. And then, everything been all sshhhhhh......... ever since. Doubt they will ever bring it up again besides talking bout some menial use or that they are still developing the science.
What? You have the internet which you're using right now. The info on the progress is at your finger tips.Don't see how I can keep progress on something like this.If you're not interested and not keeping an eye on it's progress makes no sense to create such suspicion in your head when you're relying on the media to tell you what the scientists have been announcing.Im not gon front like I can imagine where they at with cloning. I know I just found it odd in 96' they were dumb hype to announce they cloned sheep. And then, everything been all sshhhhhh......... ever since. Doubt they will ever bring it up again besides talking bout some menial use or that they are still developing the science.
I don't get this, scientists publish their progress.Labs can be transparent as they want to be and scientists publish what they want.
I read the science section in the wall street journal, there's a few professors whose e-mail chain I'm apart of that are always e-mailing news in certain fields, science daily, etc. There's a few other sites you can just google. Find the ones you're interested in.Other than that, I mean, I read alot of alternative and international news. I love science but I dont have a dedicated source for this type of information. Do you?
Are we talking about being informed on the progress in fields of science in general or specifically wanting to know what a for profit research lab has accomplished to this point?There is such a thing as private science. For profit, proprietary labs. And they can afford much more qualified scientists that your state University. Don't be dense on purpose.
Dude came off more like he didn't know much at all as if even google was a foreign concept.Which is why he said labs can be as transparent as they choose. You acted like everything was a Google search away. As if publicly published research is the pinnacle of scientific achivement. Science IS hidden. It IS kept within closed off, private groups. And it's likely more advanced than anything made public. So again, it would be difficult, to say the least, for anyone here to really know what's realistically possible or not. We've not even got into classified govt. research.
U talkin about alp