Animal-Human Hybirds or chimeras... What's your opinion?

[PublicSecrecy]

You've watched the Grudge one too many time's dude.

Anyway...what I mean by motor functions is that the mouse would be more dextrous (another typo? I'm not sure how to spell that one), in terms that it would be able to consider where to move and make a decision based on it's own opinion of where to go what to do etc. This is because the human brain doesn't even have any natural instincts anymore, nor did it 600 years ago. Ahhh the oddities of evolution. As for the problem solving, I didn't mean like going to find a key to get out of a room, I meant like finding some way to get to a piece of cheese, or into a cupboard without gnawing through it etc. kind of thing. Either way, I think they should try it with a parrot.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

You've watched the Grudge one too many time's dude.

Anyway...what I mean by motor functions is that the mouse would be more dextrous (another typo? I'm not sure how to spell that one), in terms that it would be able to consider where to move and make a decision based on it's own opinion of where to go what to do etc. This is because the human brain doesn't even have any natural instincts anymore, nor did it 600 years ago. Ahhh the oddities of evolution. As for the problem solving, I didn't mean like going to find a key to get out of a room, I meant like finding some way to get to a piece of cheese, or into a cupboard without gnawing through it etc. kind of thing. Either I think they should try it with a parrot.

Based on your description you are making it sound as if when these animals are injected with human neurons that they will become more intelligent. I don't believe this is possible. Even though the architecture of the brain in the mouse (with the neurons injected) would be 100% human, I don't think the mouse would show even the slightest similarity to a human in terms of thinking skills or cognitive behavior (or is that the same thing? ).

 

[PublicSecrecy]

I think cognitive behaviour is the ability to recieve, analyse, and make a decision based on whatever information you have used. Thinking skills are just using whatever logic you have.

 

[blargonator]

i did not see the grudge. i heard about the bears on NPR (national public radio). yeah i was thinking of something simillar to publicsecrecy's idea. i doubt they are aiming to come up with a animal that thinks in a simillar process to humans. they probably just want to make slightly smarter animals.

 

[PublicSecrecy]

Or just to see what would happen...which is even scarier.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

they probably just want to make slightly smarter animals.

What would be the point? Why "create" an animal that has even a modicum of intelligence only to kill it after you've collected the necessary research and datum (or data depending on what they are looking for)?

Or just to see what would happen...which is even scarier.

That would be horrifying. Or possibly the basis for a new Michael Crichton book.

 

[blargonator]

i hope there is a legitimate reason and not for the sake of "advancing" science. like i said earlier about the super police dogs i would be 100% behind them if it was something like that to help keep things safe or something. surely a dog that can remember and recognize people could be a very good guard.

 

[Blake]

This is because the human brain doesn't even have any natural instincts anymore, nor did it 600 years ago.

WTF, of course humans have instincts....we just don't rely on them any more and they are less apparant then in other species.

Blake

 

[Ten]

I find it ironic that I'm watching The 6th Day on TBS right now.

 

[PublicSecrecy]

WTF, of course humans have instincts....we just don't rely on them any more and they are less apparant then in other species.

Blake

You know what I mean. But if you took an un-educated race of people in the jungle and let them fend for themselves, we'll see just how much "instinct" we have. And no, I'm not sure a "gut feeling" is an instinct.

...the basis for a new Michael Crichton book.

No kidding!


Jurassic Park...Timeline...Congo...The Thirteenth Warrior...ahh good ol' MC.

 

[Famine]

This thread is SO much scientific bollocks it's not funny.

Firstly, neurons do not an intelligence make. Connections between the neurons do. Some connections turn up before birth - our genetic memory, if you will - while others form as we learn things. This is why cloning someone is not possible - you have to clone their neuronal connections too, and the human brain has been described by neurologists as "the most complicated structure in the known universe".

Secondly, headswaps (or brainswaps) are possible, but ridiculous. Alsatians and monkeys have had successful head transplants - but "successful" has a limited definition. The heads were swapped. Blood flow through the brains were normal afterwards. The ten major cranial nerves were connected, allowing gross head movements (including blinking) and autonomic regulation of the respiratory and circulatory systems, but it is, currently, impossible to connect all of the rest of the spinal column up and allow the creature to function independantly. All subjects were euthanased after the "success" was demonstrated.

Finally, Arnold Schwarzenegger is an animal/human hybrid. He has a xenotransplanted pig heart valve.

 

[Danoff]

I draw the line at self-awareness. I don't think we should be creating new species that are concious of their own existance because they can't give their consent to be a new species. It's cool if they never get born, but after they start developing it's a problem.

As for creating new species that are not self-aware - I think that's fine.

 

[Famine]

I draw the line at self-awareness. I don't think we should be creating new species that are concious of their own existance because they can't give their consent to be a new species. It's cool if they never get born, but after they start developing it's a problem.

As for creating new species that are not self-aware - I think that's fine.

I have NO clue how one would go about creating a self-aware species.

A gross example - you can somehow find all of the genes regulating a marmoset's brain development and replace all of them with the genes regulating a human's brain development (which you've also somehow found). This has to happen AT conception, in the single cell stage. The marmoset develops a human brain. Only it's inside a marmoset-sized head (problem 2), is designed for a set of human organs (problem 3), wouldn't develop any CNS connections to some "alien" parts of the marmoset physiology - like the tail (problem 4), would regulate the marmoset's body to a human physiology - 60 beats per minute, 20-30 breaths per minute, "x" metabolism, "y" concentration of oxygen/carbon dioxide in the blood, all controlled by the hypothalamus and pituitary (problem 5), and so on... These are only the simple problems I can think of off the top of my head at this time of night.

I seriously, seriously doubt that "we" can get anywhere near the level of "creating" animals with human-like brains now, or in the next decade even.


Some species are "kind of" self-aware. Chimpanzees, dolphins and pigs can recognise their own reflections - every other species cannot (to test this, show your cat a mirror).

 

[Danoff]

I have NO clue how one would go about creating a self-aware species.

I'm talking about taking a human embryo and splicing animal genes into it somehow. I have to admit, I don't really know what's possible in the realm of genetic engineering, but it seems like they can combine just about anything these days.

If you took a human embryo and somehow spliced genes into it such that it had a tail for example, but the rest remained human - that would be unacceptible to me.

 

[Famine]

That's kind of possible, but we really, really don't know what effect "implanting" any one gene would have on genes around it - or even far removed elsewhere in the genome. Replacing "faulty" genes, as with gene therapy against cystic fibrosis and the like, is fine - the gene already exists, so splicing out the crappy copy and putting a working one in should have no effect on the rest of the genome. Nail a tail gene (if there is such a thing - it's likely to be several genes, but I accept your example. The fine science behind it is kind of superfluous) in and you could suddenly find it switches off a few genes around it, or turns on a couple which aren't meant to be there and suddenly you have a female baby with a tail, seventeen testicles, three spleens and a six foot forehead. Or more likely a bunch of excessively growing cells all over the place and organs which fail to develop at all.


This is why current gene splicing experiments are done on "simple" organisms, or those with short generational periods - so that one can observe any gross changes to the organism easily and spot any hereditary effects. You can make a tomato glow green easily with no side-effects (in fact the GFP - Green Fluorescent Protein - gene is often used as a marker, so that you can see if the genes have been accepted)...

 

[PublicSecrecy]

Quite possibly the most insightfull posts of 2005.

Firstly, neurons do not an intelligence make. - Famine

Nail a tail gene in and you could suddenly find it switches off a few genes around it, or turns on a couple which aren't meant to be there and suddenly you have a female baby with a tail, seventeen testicles, three spleens and a six foot forehead. Or more likely a bunch of excessively growing cells all over the place and organs which fail to develop at all. - Famine

 

[Ten]

Secondly, headswaps (or brainswaps) are possible, but ridiculous. Alsatians and monkeys have had successful head transplants - but "successful" has a limited definition. The heads were swapped. Blood flow through the brains were normal afterwards. The ten major cranial nerves were connected, allowing gross head movements (including blinking) and autonomic regulation of the respiratory and circulatory systems, but it is, currently, impossible to connect all of the rest of the spinal column up and allow the creature to function independantly. All subjects were euthanased after the "success" was demonstrated.

My reality just crumbled. As did my appetite. Do you mean the brains were transplanted, or the entire head?

Sick...truly sick. Imagine waking up to see your body through someone else's eyes.

 

[Famine]

The heads.

I've seen the monkey head swap video. Really, really freaky stuff. They connect all the blood supply up and so on and the monkey wakes up and starts blinking. Just... bizarre.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

My reality just crumbled. As did my appetite. Do you mean the brains were transplanted, or the entire head?

Sick...truly sick. Imagine waking up to see your body through someone else's eyes.

If I remember correctly, the article stated that neurons would be injected into the brain of mice fetuses (feti? ).
I would not want to see an animal/human with a "headswap". That is just tinkering with nature and I see no scientific value in doing such a thing.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

The heads.

I've seen the monkey head swap video. Really, really freaky stuff. They connect all the blood supply up and so on and the monkey wakes up and starts blinking. Just... bizarre.

A video? On the computer?

 

[Famine]

No - on a TV popular science programme. I wouldn't even attempt to find it on the internet, although odds are it's around somewhere.

 

[Ten]

This is where I state that I've lost all faith in mankind, but I've said it so many times before.

A monkey's head...on a dog's body...

Famine, I'm secure enough to tell you that your explanation nearly brought me to tears. I can't believe the sick lengths we as a race will go to just to see how bloody smart we are.

Euthanised, you say?

"Congratulations, you're a ****ing crippled freak of science. Now die."

I suppose it's the least they could do.

Saving lives, indeed. Humanity is an ironic word.

 

[LoudMusic]

"This monkey only has four asses. It's no good to me."

 

[Ten]

Grotesque inquiry combined with my urge to learn more about things I hate in hopes of better understanding them has led me to find a few resource links. I will edit this post as I read them.

EDIT: Oh, to hell with it. As I thought, it's all over the net. Though I could find no video proof, (thank god or something like it) I found an arse load of resource links. Check out my Google results here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...&q=monkey+head+transplant+surgery&btnG=Search

This poppy, pro-Frankenstein article sickens me. How anyone could condone this is beyond me.
http://wired.com/wired/archive/8.01/transplants.html

 

[Danoff]

"Congratulations, you're a ****ing crippled freak of science. Now die."

This is why I don't think its fair to do that to self-aware species. I'm cook with doign that to dogs and rabbits or whatever.

A monkey's head...on a dog's body...

Monkeys are maybe a little too smart to be doing that to.

 

[PublicSecrecy]

Headswaps? Jesus christ. Now I'm starting to think all those Jake The Snake pictures might be real.
[edit] This may just prove that there is no god. The next most horrible thing to come: "Hey mommy, grampa's back, and hes covered in dirt!"
"raaugghwrrr!"[edit]