Should we create a neanderthal?

  Quote

 

Should we create a neanderthal?

yeah, do it, fuck it.

I'm against it. Too much bad can come out of it.

  On 1/27/2013 at 2:40 PM, tauboo said:

but brain-to-body mass ratio is the important bit.

If it's as simple as that then it follows that Neanderthals were intelligent beyond our understanding.

which would seem to go against the fact that they died out..

  On 1/27/2013 at 3:33 PM, wabby said:

 

  On 1/27/2013 at 2:40 PM, tauboo said:

but brain-to-body mass ratio is the important bit.

If it's as simple as that then it follows that Neanderthals were intelligent beyond our understanding.

it's not as simple as that. they might have had the capacity to be more intelligent but became obsessed with body building or something.

Ok. If I got 100 000 000$ right now and a major Hollywood studio was at my disposal I'd make a movie about how our ancestors wiped out neanderthals as they gave up wanting peace and our ancestors wouldn't have any of it.

It would be shot as a mix of Odyssey 2001 and Koyaanisqatsi styles.

they didn't fully die out, we got freaky with them. if you're not from africa you're part neanderthal already.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=neandertal-genome-study-r

not sure how i feel about creating a new one, but i'm not gonna sit here and pretend this is a technology anybody can stop forever. synthetic biology is just going to be more and more common. kids used to blow up frogs... now they'll play with their genes.

  On 1/27/2013 at 5:28 PM, gaarg said:

Ok. If I got 100 000 000$ right now and a major Hollywood studio was at my disposal I'd make a movie about how our ancestors wiped out neanderthals as they gave up wanting peace and our ancestors wouldn't have any of it.

 

It would be shot as a mix of Odyssey 2001 and Koyaanisqatsi styles.

This.

We should create one and let it piss in the eyes of every single creationist.

Of course we should. Why is this even a question?

I am 100% behind Dr. Church's idea

  On 1/27/2013 at 5:51 PM, zkreso said:

Of course we should. Why is this even a question?

wait, so the creation of one of these things would essentially debunk christianity etc. ?

  On 1/27/2013 at 3:11 PM, gaarg said:

I'm against it.

point

no

  On 1/28/2013 at 12:50 PM, isaki said:

 

  On 1/27/2013 at 5:51 PM, zkreso said:

Of course we should. Why is this even a question?

wait, so the creation of one of these things would essentially debunk christianity etc. ?

i fail to see how that works.

I am also against this. While it would be super interesting, is nobody concerned with the ethics of this? We are essentially creating a semi-human being, definitely intelligent with self-conciousness. Would he have human rights? How would that guy feel, being the only one of his kind on the whole planet, basically created for "show" and an object created for science. Nobody could really be sure about his "legal" status, i.e. a strange creature, not human, not animal that we don't really have working categories for yet?

That seems to me like the first step of scientists playing creators and doing dubious experiments with sentient being who would deserve better than being created at the will of some human overlords. There are so many ethical problems with cloning human beings, how would that be different.

Apart from that, the guy would so definitely become WWE champion.

btw, how do creationists explain neanderthals? I get how they deal with apes, i.e. they exist but no evolutionary connection to us. but what about the intermediate stages?

  On 1/28/2013 at 11:36 PM, dese manz hatin said:

btw, how do creationists explain neanderthals? I get how they deal with apes, i.e. they exist but no evolutionary connection to us. but what about the intermediate stages?

gord put dem ere to testus

no, it's unethical. imagine what type of life he or she would lead. it would be awful.

on the other hand, imagine the reddit ama, the memoir, the guest appearance on survivorman.

i hope he will be elected as governor of california

  On 1/29/2013 at 12:04 AM, Hoodie said:

no, it's unethical. imagine what type of life he or she would lead. it would be awful.

it's depressing everyone assumes this. I'd like to think we'd be better than that. For one thing, they could interbreed with us, so it's not like they'd have to be alone forever. And with modern dress, I don't think they'd stand out more in a crowd than say, an australian aborigine or papua new guinean would.

on the other hand, they'd have no parents, and there doesn't seem to be much research value to bringing them back to life. It's not like they could teach us how neanderthals made stone tools or cave paintings.

  On 1/27/2013 at 2:45 PM, BCM said:

only if pauly shore is involved somehow. and by involved i mean killed.

 

I say do it, but if the Neanderthal ends up not being a super cool cave-bro like Brendan Frasier, then I'm gonna be really disappointed.

i think, instead, these scientist people should focus on making a monstrous human centipede body with plenty of arms and legs (no ass to mouth just one big body), and multiple eyes and all the tools i would need to survive forever after they put my brain inside it. lets do this.

and under tools that includes a usb port so i can interface and hack stuff like R2.

some of the arms and legs, and the skeleton, should be metal too. just this badass human cyborg centipede.