Reviving the Thylacine -

Sal the Mudokon · #31 05-31-2002, 07:04 AM

I dont think it would be possible to implant a human child into a chimp or vise versa because humans and chimps are simply not close enough. If a human and a chimp mated (which I'm sure some ass hole has done), they could not produce offspring. Its this closeness that I think an organism would need to be in the womb of another.
So much must go between the baby and the mother if you really take the time to think about it... Okay, enough of that.
In fact, in some studies, the babies of surrogate mothers have amounts of the surrogate mother's DNA and I've even heard of them looking like them. I suppose that we don't know much about this technology, much like cloning, which is EXTREMELY inefficient... though most people don't think.
And Sydney, if it were possible to clone some one in the Hollywood fashion, then it would probably be best described like it was in "The Sixth Day". Otherwise, cloning is more like it is in, say, "The Boys From Brazil" or even (without the growth-speeding technology) "Star Wars: Episode II".

One, Two, Middlesboogie · #32 05-31-2002, 11:26 AM

:

Originally posted by Sydney
Speaking of surrogate motherhood, would it be theoretically possible to implant a human embryo into the womb of a chimpanzee, or vice versa? *fiendish giggle*

Yes, I'm sure it would be. Over 97% of human genetic material is identical to chimpanzees' (incidentally, 30% of our genetic material is identical to that of lettuce!); in fact, chimps are more closely related to us than they are to any of the other anthropoids. Human birth control pills also work on gorillas.

But why the smeg would you want to?

LuxoJr · #33 05-31-2002, 12:35 PM

97 percent? That's incredible!

As for the lettuce, is that the same 30% we'd also share with all organic life forms? Or do we have some bizarre 'lettuce gene' somewhere that's unique to humans?

Gluk Schmuck · #34 05-31-2002, 02:50 PM

:

Originally posted by One, Two, Middlesboogie
Yes, I'm sure it would be. Over 97% of human genetic material is identical to chimpanzees' (incidentally, 30% of our genetic material is identical to that of lettuce!); in fact, chimps are more closely related to us than they are to any of the other anthropoids.

Paedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than you or I.

Jacob · #35 05-31-2002, 07:27 PM

:

Paedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than you or I.

Lol, i didn't see what was wrong with that episode? At least it touched on something most would pass up. And it wasn't really supporting Paedophiles was it? Although, i do think they could of used less words that gays got called to use in insulting the Paedophiles. (Nonce etc)

Gluk Schmuck · #36 05-31-2002, 08:19 PM

:

Originally posted by Jacob
Although, i do think they could of used less words that gays got called to use in insulting the Paedophiles. (Nonce etc)

Doesn't 'nonce' mean paedophile?

Danny · #37 05-31-2002, 08:24 PM

97 percent? Is that all?

Jacob · #38 05-31-2002, 08:47 PM

Its used for Gays aswell...in some places...i tink.

Sydney · #39 05-31-2002, 11:58 PM

:

Originally posted by One, Two, Middlesboogie
But why the smeg would you want to?

I have my reasons...

I was told that we have over 99% of the same DNA as chimpanzees. But other sources say 97, 98, etc.

LuxoJr · #40 06-01-2002, 07:37 AM

The Chaser did a hilarious spoof article on finding the 'Catholic gene' amidst arguments over homosexuality 'acquisition' (or whatever). It was in a book, so I can't c/v the text here. Funny stuff, though.

One, Two, Middlesboogie · #41 06-01-2002, 06:24 PM

:

Originally posted by Danny
97 percent? Is that all?

:

Originally posted by Sydney
I was told that we have over 99% of the same DNA as chimpanzees. But other sources say 97, 98, etc.

Hence me saying over 97%.

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #42 06-01-2002, 11:44 PM

That tiger looks sick. Or he has'nt been on the proper diet.

Sydney · #43 06-02-2002, 12:04 AM

:

Originally posted by PinkHaired Mudokon CWR
That tiger looks sick. Or he has'nt been on the proper diet.

They're supposed to look like that. Remember, it's not really a dog or a tiger, it's a marsupial. Thylacines have more in common with kangaroos, wombats and wallabies than they do with dogs or tigers.

PinkHaired Mudokon CWR · #44 06-02-2002, 01:46 PM

Well it looks diseased and unattractive.

Sydney · #45 06-03-2002, 05:35 AM

:

Originally posted by PinkHaired Mudokon CWR
Well it looks diseased and unattractive.

Thanks Pinky, you've provided reasonable grounds not to bring this species back from extinction.

LuxoJr · #46 06-03-2002, 08:26 AM

:

They're supposed to look like that

In accordance with Public Thylacine Dress Code #4088, which states that:

1. All Thylacines are allowed, but no limited to, 15 stripes.

2. Maximum tail-ground clearance must not fall below 3.5cm. Only under exceptional circumstances in accordance with the Premature Extinction Act may Thylacines apply for additional clearance rights. In these instances, both parties involved in the tail-ground infringment must obtain the relevant documentation from their local advisory boards.

Danny · #47 06-06-2002, 09:41 PM

:

Originally posted by LuxoJr
In accordance with Public Thylacine Dress Code #4088, which states that:

1. All Thylacines are allowed, but no limited to, 15 stripes.

2. Maximum tail-ground clearance must not fall below 3.5cm. Only under exceptional circumstances in accordance with the Premature Extinction Act may Thylacines apply for additional clearance rights. In these instances, both parties involved in the tail-ground infringment must obtain the relevant documentation from their local advisory boards.

*has his drink coming out of his nose* That wouldn't have been half as funny if I hadn't taken it seriously at first...