No cloned Neanderthal baby for Harvard (at least not yet)


10 Responses to “No cloned Neanderthal baby for Harvard (at least not yet)”

  1. proginoskes says:

    I read a good book about this years ago.

  2. Well, that’s a relief.  It looked like they were trying to mix the DNA of Encino Man and Rosemary’s Mary there for a moment.

  3. Henry Pootel says:

    Maybe they mistook his Craigslist “Men Seeking Women” ad 

    • Actually there are tons of ads on Craigslist for gestational surrogates. Plenty for egg donors too. Jewish egg donors can make about 50% more than other egg donors because of Jewish laws about ethnic identity. You’d think having a Jewish gestational mother would be enough. I think the work of carrying a pregnancy gives the gestational mother as much a claim on the baby as the genetic mother has. But I suppose this is sexism at work. As Katha Pollitt said, “The important thing abuot genes is that men have them.” It would seem that gestation is mere “women’s work” and thus it doesn’t count for much.

  4. SedanChair says:

    Sure guys, “translation error.” It’s all fun and games until you end up getting mind controlled by a Neanderthal with his giant brain. 

    Our ancestors didn’t fight a war against the Neanderthals for egghead scientists to let them in through the back door! NOT IN MY NAME

  5. Sparrow says:

    For some reason, this was the book that came to mind:

  6. Luther Blissett says:

    Just for the record, here’s the “original” source (after gtranslate): seems the germans really messed this up. What a junk of “popular science reporting”. Dreadful.

    /edit: there’s a feedback link on that page. While the field titles are not translated, you may still have a go and spread this link. Would be legit if they got some mild bashing about this: they *really* published this under science/medicine! LeFuq, it reads like yellow press.

Leave a Reply