Human + Chimp = ?

Huw Jonathan Rogers huw at spls5.ccs.mt.nec.co.jp
Wed Jul 24 02:41:16 EST 1991


	I apologise. I posted a totally amoral article just a few
hours ago... Sorry to those who got offended. I mean it.

In article <9107240507.AA28288 at spls5.ccs.mt.nec.co.jp> huw at ccs.mt.nec.co.jp (Huw
 Jonathan Rogers) writes:
>In article <1991Jul23.172213.603 at mlb.semi.harris.com> rcomarow at hsscam.mis.semi.
harris.com writes:
>:>A successful Chimpanzee Human cross would make the idea that Humans had
>:>evolved from Apes much more believable to some of the more than 50% of
>:>this planet's population that still does not believe in evolution.  This
>:>would reduce the control of religion and religious leaders over the minds
>:>of people.  In time, this might prevent a war or two.  Also, Creationists
>:>would have a harder time keeping evolution from being taught in American
>:>schools.  Children would get to spend more time on one of the most
>:>fascinating of scientific theories.  This would get more kids turned on to
>:>science.
>:
>:Ah, but it's quite clear that people did not evolve from Apes, that
>:instead we share a common ancestor.
>:
>:But, just think of the commercial possibilities.  We could create a
>:race of "Chimpoles" that could do all our menial labor, produce spare
>:body parts simply for the taking :-)
>:
>
>       Actually I had the same idea - the chimera breed would likely be
>half way between chimp and human both physically and mentally (in terms of
>intelligence). Such beings could have a lot of use - particularly if
>fertile. Could cause societal problems though, and there would a lot of
>scope for *bad* exploitation if things weren't watched... drugs testing,
>dangerous environment (radiation?) work, space, organs, servants, etc.
>

	Ok this sounds bad - was deliberately amoral and provocative
'cause I wanted feedback... Note I did say "*bad* exploitation". Any
would be bad/immoral - I was just reflecting likely results of such
a breed being created.

>       The only problem is funding of course - but if someone's really
>interested in doing this then I can't see it being that expensive - just
>need a chimp, and some willing fertile woman with few scruples... There

	Yes well also amoral - and a sad reflection on society. Apologies
to those who got offended... Just reflecting the likely views of many
individuals and not really my own.

	I got this from the moderator as well:

>>
>>I don't like this "do our menial labor" or "lot of uses" stuff.
>>Need not have a "willing fertile woman with few scruples" as
>>a simple artificial insemination of a female chimp would do.
>>
>>So your message did not go to the list,
>>

	I reply:

	Erm well it was a bit outrageous - and deliberately so...
Anyway it's on the molbio group now. I did say there was a lot
of scope for "*bad* exploitation"... Ok so it's a serious issue
but I think you took this in the wrong spirit - this article was
deliberately provocative and amoral - it'll get feedback and that's
wanted I wanted to hear. Don't really care too much what people
think of what I actually wrote.
	Also of the quotes above, the first one was from another
poster, the second (in context) is perfectly reasonable, and the
third is (as I have said) an unfortunate reflection of society.
	Many aplogies,

	-Huw

[ H.J.Rogers  INTERNET: huw at ccs.mt.nec.co.jp                       ]
[    ,_,      JANET: huw%ccs.mt.nec.co.jp at uk.ac.nsfnet-relay       ]
[  :-(_)-o   "Either code it for speed, or don't code it at all."  ]
[   _} {_    "I'll be back..."                                     ]

[          THIS EMAIL ADDRESS ONLY VALID UNTIL 12/9/1991           ]



More information about the Mol-evol mailing list