PM_ME_FAT_ENBIES@lib.lgbt to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2年前incest cloneslib.lgbtimagemessage-square24fedilinkarrow-up1220
arrow-up1220imageincest cloneslib.lgbtPM_ME_FAT_ENBIES@lib.lgbt to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2年前message-square24fedilink
minus-square30p87@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up5·2年前Also, twins aren’t identical copies either. Different fingerprint etc.
minus-squareGreyEyedGhost@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up5·2年前Fingerprints aren’t genetically coded, and clones wouldn’t have the same fingerprints, either.
minus-square30p87@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-22年前I typically associate “clone” with “an exact copy”, with the same exact molecular layout and even thoughts. So a literal exact copy. Clones on a DNA basis, so something possible for years, would indeed be different in some details.
minus-squarePM_ME_FAT_ENBIES@lib.lgbtOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2年前The definition of “clone” you believe in is science fiction nonsense. Why believe in nonsense when the scientific definition of clone is different?
Also, twins aren’t identical copies either. Different fingerprint etc.
Fingerprints aren’t genetically coded, and clones wouldn’t have the same fingerprints, either.
I typically associate “clone” with “an exact copy”, with the same exact molecular layout and even thoughts. So a literal exact copy. Clones on a DNA basis, so something possible for years, would indeed be different in some details.
The definition of “clone” you believe in is science fiction nonsense. Why believe in nonsense when the scientific definition of clone is different?