Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientist Seeks 'Adventurous Human Woman' For Neanderthal Baby

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the try-craigslist dept.

Biotech 697

theodp writes "Harvard geneticist George Church recently told Der Spiegel he's close to developing the necessary technology to clone a Neanderthal, at which point all he'd need is an 'adventurous human woman' to be a surrogate mother for the first Neanderthal baby to be born in 30,000 years (article in German, translation to English). Church said, 'We have lots of Neanderthal parts around the lab. We are creating Neanderthal cells. Let's say someone has a healthy, normal Neanderthal baby. Well, then, everyone will want to have a Neanderthal kid. Were they superstrong or supersmart? Who knows? But there's one way to find out.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

30000 years? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637021)

With that sort of gestation time, it's no wonder Neanderthals went extinct.

Re:30000 years? (2, Funny)

alphatel (1450715) | about 2 years ago | (#42637043)

With that sort of gestation time, it's no wonder Neanderthals went extinct.

It doesn't take that long to pop out a Nean. Apparently most of us have up to 4% of their genes already, so what's the point of the experiment? Why not have one of those Canadians mate with an Ecuadorian. The results would be so craaaaazy.

Re:30000 years? (4, Interesting)

tqk (413719) | about 2 years ago | (#42637259)

Why not have one of those Canadians mate with an Ecuadorian.

As a Canadian male, I can honestly say I'd have no problem with that.

Yes, most of us (excepting most Africans and Chinese) have Neanderthal genes in us. We inter-bred. Apparently, we gained much of our resistance to noxious germs from them. Neanderthals aren't dead. They merged with us Homo Sapiens, and apparently willingly for the most part (as far as can be told).

I was happy to hear it. The prior theory I heard was that we either/or out-evolved/genocided them. Cool.

Re:30000 years? (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | about 2 years ago | (#42637397)

So resistance was futile, tqk of borg?

Re:30000 years? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637231)

All wrong. Go back to the drawing board, this time with feline DNA.

We don't want babies. We want nyanderthal cats!

Re:30000 years? (0)

jlund (73067) | about 2 years ago | (#42637303)

All wrong. Go back to the drawing board, this time with feline DNA.

Neanderthal CATS HO!

Re:30000 years? (0)

rhyder128k (1051042) | about 2 years ago | (#42637271)

God Shcmod - I want my monkey man!

Kardashian? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637025)

They should ask one of those Kardashian women. They'll do anything for money as long as they can put their name on it.

Re:Kardashian? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637041)

Plus by the looks of em they'd be genetically similar.

Re:Kardashian? (1)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 years ago | (#42637053)

They should ask one of those Kardashian women. They'll do anything for money as long as they can put their name on it.

Only if the Professor is a professional basketball player or a rapper. I can see Kris now trying to hock the rights for the baby pics.

Re:Kardashian? (2, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | about 2 years ago | (#42637057)

"Me Kardashian boy, you flat!" *Kabooonk!*

Re:Kardashian? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637107)

I often pet my nutsack as if it's a small animal. What say you?

Re: Kardashian? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637141)

First time in a long time I laughed out loud at a troll! Thank you! Really. Thanks, man.

Re:Kardashian? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637233)

I often tweeze the hairs on my nutsack, so that it looks like a naked mole rat.

Re:Kardashian? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637187)

Keep your starships away from the kardashian border..

Re:Kardashian? (5, Insightful)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 2 years ago | (#42637241)

Thats really unfair on the baby. How would you like to be related to a Kardashian?

Re:Kardashian? (2)

AbRASiON (589899) | about 2 years ago | (#42637323)

Based on the comments I see on the gossip blogs (my weakness for hot pics) it appears the general consensus is that one of the sisters already is a relative of the neanderthal species.

(Although I think she still scrubs up alright TBH)

Re:Kardashian? (1)

nospam007 (722110) | about 2 years ago | (#42637337)

"They should ask one of those Kardashian women. They'll do anything for money as long as they can put their name on it."

Not to mention that they have lots of hair on their backs already.

Re:Kardashian? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637345)

They should ask one of those Kardashian women. They'll do anything for money as long as they can put their name on it.

Beyonce shoulda had that Neanderthal baby.

  - Kanye

Pretty sure we know (3, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#42637027)

Were they superstrong or supersmart? Who knows? But there's one way to find out

Well I don't know about the former, but given they are all dead I'm pretty sure about the latter.

Re:Pretty sure we know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637095)

Sorry, intelligence is overrated. Neanderthals could easily have been better at abstract thinking then we are.

Re:Pretty sure we know (5, Funny)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 2 years ago | (#42637137)

"Well I don't know about the former, but given they are all dead I'm pretty sure about the latter."

Not at all. They were superstrong and supersmart. Unfortunately for them, they were also supergullible.

Re:Pretty sure we know (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637203)

Unfortunately for them, they were also supergullible.

Well, then the Army would be interested.

Re:Pretty sure we know (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637383)

John Kerry [youtube.com] , is that you?

Re:Pretty sure we know (5, Interesting)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637215)

...or they were actually decent and genuinely nice people.
Let me be the first to introduce a new concept into the theory of evolution: the survival of the utter bastards.

Re:Pretty sure we know (1)

webmistressrachel (903577) | about 2 years ago | (#42637281)

1 person Liked this. Be the first of your friends!

Re:Pretty sure we know (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637289)

1 person Liked this. Be the first of your friends!

Mom? Is that you?

Re:Pretty sure we know (1)

Grayhand (2610049) | about 2 years ago | (#42637403)

"Well I don't know about the former, but given they are all dead I'm pretty sure about the latter."

Not at all. They were superstrong and supersmart. Unfortunately for them, they were also supergullible.

Sad how buying bridges and swampland off crafty Homo Sapiens lead to their extinction.

Re:Pretty sure we know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637143)

I've seen Encino Man [imdb.com] and he was certainly smarter than the guy who found him.

Re:Pretty sure we know (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637159)

Yeah, because right now only the smart people are breeding, and idiots don't have any kids.

Re:Pretty sure we know (3, Interesting)

tqk (413719) | about 2 years ago | (#42637283)

Were they superstrong or supersmart? Who knows? But there's one way to find out

Well I don't know about the former, but given they are all dead I'm pretty sure about the latter.

So, you don't much care for SciFi. Superman's planet's gone. Vulcan's gone. The Asgard are gone. All super smart and powerful, long before your puny ancestors were even capable of wallowing in the mud onto dry land.

Shallow as a pane of glass, you are.

Re:Pretty sure we know (1)

doug141 (863552) | about 2 years ago | (#42637347)

Was the native american wiped out by lack of smarts? Incas wipes out by lack of smarts? The book guns, germs, and steel makes the case you can wipe a folk out with germs pretty easily if they don't have immunity, so that right there could have been the neaderthals's demise. The book goes on to point out advanced weapons aren't in the hands of advanced individuals, but merely individuals who've had the benefit of living in fertile areas that could support an educated class. The book actually argues that while advanced civilizations make advanced things, they also lower the bar for the culling of dumb individuals, and suffer more of them.

Re:Pretty sure we know (4, Insightful)

gmuslera (3436) | about 2 years ago | (#42637387)

Being intelligent don't ensure your survival. You needed a lot of intelligence to build atomic bombs, and see what could had happened.

Anyway, intelligence is just part of the equation. Culture is another, an important one. How much different should be a neanderthal intelligence to be distinguished from one of us if grows with our culture? And maybe more important, if with our culture is more or less like us, at least in the way of thinking, will be falling in the same kind of moral problems like growing kids on labs?

Re:Pretty sure we know (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637389)

Did they have a fun virus that wiped out many of their ancestors, that we now lack immunity for? Who knows, lets find out!

Re:Pretty sure we know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637391)

Given that all humans are descended from Neanderthals, human women might have simply been easier than Neanderthal women.

No he's not (5, Insightful)

santax (1541065) | about 2 years ago | (#42637031)

He's not seeking such a woman, nor is he planning to do so. He is just thinking out loud, what if...

Re:No he's not (1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about 2 years ago | (#42637093)

"He is just thinking out loud, what if..."

Well, he might as well think about the artificial womb that would go along with his Frankensteinian project. For something more in the spirit of the mad doctor, he could go digging for zombies to reanimate. Another possibility embedding in the female of any of the larger primate species.

Re:No he's not (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637119)

...besides, what's the scientific value of such an undertaking?

If somebody ACTUALLY wanted to study Neanderthals he'd just have to go to a television network. They have loads of them and plenty to spare.
And since that also tends to be the typical hangout of Sir Richard Attenborough you wouldn't need to bring your own.
Instant Neanderthal research and documentary.

Re:No he's not (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637171)

The difference between what we can learn from the fossil record and what we can learn from the real live species are vastly different. This could be said for practically any extinct species, and I think it would be worthwhile to bring back and study an otherwise extinct animal to learn from it.

Re:No he's not (5, Interesting)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637273)

When the "specimen" is a sentient being then suddenly "ethics" enter the equation. We'd need to resolve those first.
Since the definition of "ethics" is basically "something that can't be resolved or defined" I think we bought us another 30k years.

There. Job done. Splendid. Another cup of tea?

Re:No he's not (1)

sunderland56 (621843) | about 2 years ago | (#42637235)

Why not try it? I'm sure he could get GEICO to fund the project.

Re:No he's not (1)

nospam007 (722110) | about 2 years ago | (#42637355)

"He's not seeking such a woman, nor is he planning to do so."

Even if he did, it's cloning of a homo sapiens and as such falls under the relevant laws that were done after the Dolly 'incident'.

Clone a mammoth first (5, Insightful)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 2 years ago | (#42637033)

It would make sense to clone a mammoth first, using an Asian elephant as a surrogate. The last mammoths on Wrangel Island were alive only 2000 years ago, so their DNA should be much more intact. If we can clone the mammoth successfully, then we can do the neanderthal next.

Re:Clone a mammoth first (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 2 years ago | (#42637121)

How the hell did Mammoths get onto an island? Ice bridge? I must have missed that Ice Age sequel.

Re:Clone a mammoth first (2)

tragedy (27079) | about 2 years ago | (#42637173)

Aside from ice brides and land rafts, they could almost certainly swim. Modern elephants have been witnessed swimming 300 miles.

Re:Clone a mammoth first (1)

tragedy (27079) | about 2 years ago | (#42637181)

"Ice brides". Great typo there. Meant "bridges" obviously, but "brides" has so many comedic possibilities.

Re:Clone a mammoth first (1)

LynnwoodRooster (966895) | about 2 years ago | (#42637205)

If your bride was cold as ice, you'd swim 300 miles to get laid, too!

Re:Clone a mammoth first (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637223)

They also make great submarines. They have a snorkel.
But mammoths would be better. Their fur is bound to be messing with SONAR.
We could station THOUSANDS of submerged mammoths in the Baltic Sea as nuclear launchpads!

Re:Clone a mammoth first (3, Informative)

riverat1 (1048260) | about 2 years ago | (#42637253)

Until sea level rose at the end of the last glaciation Wrangel Island was not an island so they just walked there. It probably didn't get cut off from the mainland until less than 10,000 years ago.

Re:Clone a mammoth first (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637379)

I must have missed that Ice Age sequel.

I watched every Ice Age movie and remember seeing an island on which some animals were temporarily stranded. Is it sad when a 40+ year old enjoys watching the animated movie Ice Age?

Re:Clone a mammoth first (2)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637145)

Couldn't we just clone Brigitte Bardot? Our current supply is running out.
And they are easier ont the tarmac(and the eyes) than a mammoth.
Also, don't moths eat socks? I don't want woolly elephants sitting in my closet munching on my socks.

"Wolf" man. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637035)

That saying about the sum being greater than it's parts, only applies when you know how the parts fit together.

Re:"Wolf" man. (1)

tqk (413719) | about 2 years ago | (#42637361)

That saying about the sum being greater than it's parts, only applies when you know how the parts fit together.

Moron. Alfred Nobel's calling. Will you accept the charges?

They are still alive (3, Funny)

xs650 (741277) | about 2 years ago | (#42637045)

Having spent some time in rural Northern Germany, I believe Neanderthals are still alive.

Re:They are still alive (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637133)

They have their own party here in the United States. Its called the T-party.

Re:They are still alive (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637167)

There's no need to insult Neaderthals like that.

Re:They are still alive (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637157)

We also have pockets of Neanderthals in the south.
Reports of their extinction are wildly exaggerated.

Couldn' we just clone something that is ACTUALLY extinct? Just the other day I read the common pubic louse is about to go extinct. Something to do with Brazilian landing strips. I knew they shouldn't have cut down the rain forest.

Re:They are still alive (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637375)

This is truth on the internet

Somehow I don't think (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637047)

Someone is getting Tenure.

I'm afraid to to read the actual article to see if its someone I know from Grad school or some poor bastard I taught.

Is the NFL behind this? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 2 years ago | (#42637051)

They need "humans" with thicker skulls after all the brain damage lawsuits.

Reminds me of the work by... (3, Interesting)

eksith (2776419) | about 2 years ago | (#42637061)

Ilya Ivanovich Ivanov [wikipedia.org] . They all resulted in failure (allegedly, some conspiracy theorists insist he was at least partially successful). I don't think that he'll have difficulty finding volunteers, only finding a place with neighbors who aren't keen on pitchforks and torches.

Shouldn't be too hard ... (3, Funny)

lysdexia (897) | about 2 years ago | (#42637063)

I found one to have my potentially ugly baby.

Oh great, yet more conservatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637073)

*ducks head*

This may not end well (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637079)

I seem to recall this being a sci-fi short story somewheres a long time ago... "Jerry Was A Boy"? or something similar to that as the title.

Become the Mother of The Next Dennis Rodman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637081)

My money is on really strong and really dumb. Apparently a winning combination.

Okay, really (2)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 years ago | (#42637085)

I realize that this guy's intentions are honorable, well maybe not, but this sounds like something that really shouldn't be done along the lines of Jurassic Park. With all of the problems in the world, we have a guy here who is trying to bring back an extinct race of people? Somehow I think that the old Nazi era eugenics movement [wikipedia.org] never stopped. Next thing you know we'll have immigrant Neanderthal workers takin our jobs! Let's just leave the bringing old species alone and keep Neanderthals where they belong! Extinct! I don't want to see a Mammoth roaming about, besides with global warming it would lose its hair and it would be killed within a few short years for the ivory.

Re:Okay, really (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637185)

Also, mammoths and neanderthals cloning filling in the gaps with frog DNA are bound to be a bit....off.

I don't want no big woolly elephants jumping around underneath my window. Also their snatching up Neanderthals using their long tongues could become an issue.
Neanderthals sitting on lillypads on the other hands would be a great attraction for public parks.

What would Morgan Freeman say? (3, Interesting)

WarSpiteX (98591) | about 2 years ago | (#42637087)

I don't mean to sound too flippant about this, but isn't this around the time in the movie that a Morgan Freeman type of character says "People were not meant to play at god!"?

Re:What would Morgan Freeman say? (4, Insightful)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 2 years ago | (#42637127)

I don't mean to sound too flippant about this, but isn't this around the time in the movie that a Morgan Freeman type of character says "People were not meant to play at god!"?

People play God all the time, just usually with guns, bombs, Wall Street, etc...

Re:What would Morgan Freeman say? (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637201)

Well, now that Morgan Freeman explained to me why it is a bad idea I do COMPLETELY understand what's going on.
But isn't it already too late when he shows up? Are we already doomed? Morgan? Could you please explain?

Re:What would Morgan Freeman say? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637269)

God doesn't exist, we can't play him.

Re:What would Morgan Freeman say? (1)

Smauler (915644) | about 2 years ago | (#42637331)

How is this people playing at god?

I've never understood the "playing god" argument. Who are we [jokesgallery.com] to know God's will?

Substitute genetic engineers with rescuers in that joke, and you get my point.

I personally do not believe in God, and I also believe there are moral questions raised with regards to genetic engineering and selection. However, I see no moral problems at all from allowing an extinct species to live. The technology will be there soon, and I look forward to it. I'm not talking Jurassic park, nor necessarily mammoths yet - we have very recently extinct species that might be revived.

That being said... there's no point in reviving them if there is nowhere for them to go - they went extinct for a reason, and if that reason is not changed, us keeping a few of the species alive isn't exactly productive IMO. It may be cool, and we could keep them in zoos, but I would personally look at funding preservation of current species over reviving dead ones.... apart from when the species is really cool, like sabre toothed tigers.

Re:What would Morgan Freeman say? (2)

number11 (129686) | about 2 years ago | (#42637411)

I see no moral problems at all from allowing an extinct species to live.

But a Neanderthal wouldn't do that, any more than a single random homo sap would. It's going to need a mate, and a reasonable gene pool. Maybe a couple of thousand of them (with different genetics) would do.

Actually, I do see moral problems, although nowhere as great as those in causing a living species to go extinct. But it might be smarter to start with species that we don't consider sentient (though I'm not sure how one proves that any species more advanced than an amoeba is, or is not). How about passenger pigeons?

I expect a buyout (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 2 years ago | (#42637097)

Schwarzenegger is afraid of the competition

I'll Be Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637131)

Actually, his mom already participated in this experiment

Re:I'll Be Back (2)

geminidomino (614729) | about 2 years ago | (#42637153)

Yeah, but that got us Danny DeVito, too, so it wasn't a TOTAL loss.

Jurassic Pork? (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 2 years ago | (#42637109)

Call Spielberg. I've got a movie idea - though I might be thinking of something I saw on one of the "adult" channels...

Boobginas, the clone of boobs plus a vagina. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637117)

We need to make more of them.

grrrrr (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | about 2 years ago | (#42637123)

O.K. Fine. Whatever. I'll go make room in the trailer park for another trailer. Stupid ass scientist making more work... /grumble

Unethical (5, Interesting)

markdavis (642305) | about 2 years ago | (#42637177)

I consider myself very scientific, fairly worldly, and pretty open minded.

But to me this is unethical.

Ask yourself just some simple preliminary questions such as: If the resulting semi-human is self aware, what rights will it/he/she have? Will it/he/she be a cage animal? Will it be sterilized or allowed to reproduce? And if so, with which other species or semi-species? Is this fair to it/he/she? Will it/he/she be allowed to vote? To own property? Be allowed or required to work? To choose a field of education? To be free of staring, poking prodding?

Re:Unethical (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637237)

Actually if you put a Neanderthal into a suit(or better tshirt and jeans) he wouldn't stand out too much in a crowd.
Unless of course you overdo it with the novelty hats...

Re:Unethical (2)

joe_frisch (1366229) | about 2 years ago | (#42637341)

Are you sure? We don't know much about their mental abilities or emotions. They might be too passive or too aggressive, or simply have incompatible responses to situations to live with modern humans.

Re:Unethical (2)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637381)

Wel, their brains were bigger than ours(altho in this instance size doesn't matter that much) and their sceletons give us a pretty good idea about muscle distribution and facial expression.
Surprisingly Hollywood depictions turn out to be unscientific.

Yes, I'm shocked, too.

Re:Unethical (2)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#42637293)

From your final paragraph I thought you must be a lawyer, but then I realised you mentioned ethics above it.

Ultimately, if they're human enough to demand rights they'll get them, and if ethical people don't do things like this it merely ensures that the only people doing it will be the unethical. It's going to happen before long, and plenty of other experiments which will make breeding Neanderthals look tame. First company to breed cat-girls is going to make a killing in the Japanese market.

BTW, the Soviets conducted experiments where they tried to breed female volunteers with apes, so I doubt there'll be much trouble with finding volunteers for this one.

Re:Unethical (1)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637353)

...they'd need to breed an aweful lot of them to start a Neanderthal Rights Movement.
A crowd of one is bound to be treated badly.

Remember: we are the vicious bastards that didn't go extinct...

Re:Unethical (1)

Smauler (915644) | about 2 years ago | (#42637369)

You're making the point that something that could possibly be brought back into existence might be difficult to deal with with our current systems of ethics.

You are _not_ making the point that bringing them back into existence is unethical. You're not arguing against the process.

Bear in mind that Neanderthals lived alongside Homo Sapiens for thousands of years - we're not reinventing anything here.

If nothing else (1)

erichill (583191) | about 2 years ago | (#42637183)

This will definitely give the bio-ethicists something to chew on.

Reprehensible. (1, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | about 2 years ago | (#42637191)

If this actually happens, I hope that the kid beats the living shit out of the asshole who wanted him for a lab animal.

-jcr

Re:Reprehensible. (3, Interesting)

bfandreas (603438) | about 2 years ago | (#42637251)

If this actually happens, I hope that the kid beats the living shit out of the asshole who wanted him for a lab animal.

-jcr

This usually involves burning windmills and crowds who can get their hands on pitchforks and torches.
But from a scientific point of view it would be a TRIUMPH!
Does the article say if he also plans to clone a bride for him?

Re:Reprehensible. (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 2 years ago | (#42637257)

"My mother was a test tube, my father was a knife"

-R.A.H

Re:Reprehensible. (1)

sconeu (64226) | about 2 years ago | (#42637407)

Hello, Friday!!!!!

Uhmmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637193)

Am I the only one that thinks this is a bad idea?

Please read Asimov first (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637213)

The Ugly Little Boy. Nothing further needs saying.

He needs to advertise for (1)

n0tquitesane (1533455) | about 2 years ago | (#42637239)

Edith Fellowes. She has experience caring for an ugly little boy

I'm a Neanderthal (4, Funny)

The_Star_Child (2660919) | about 2 years ago | (#42637243)

So we can just skip the artificial insemination and do it the good ol' fashion way...

Test tube caveman lawyer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637299)

One hundred thousand years ago, a caveman was out hunting in the plains, when he slipped and fell into a crevasse, where he was frozen solid. In 1988, he was discovered by scientists and was thawed out. He then attended law school and became...The Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer!

I for one welcome our ginger overlords (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637307)

I have no idea if they had red hair - who knows. While it might be interesting to do, they were wiped out by human's ancestors so don't mess with the timeline. Or is the evolution of man to be able to change history? Oh philosophy how you taunt me.

Will they have rights? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637349)

Will they have rights? Be aloud to breed? That sort of cruel to bring something that will most likely be able to communicate and think very much like we do and told that their an experiment and are essentially somebodies property.

God (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42637401)

I asked God what Neanderthals thought about... "warmth". Let's ask what they did for fun! C:\Text\WALDEN.TXT against society; but I preferred that society should run "amok" against me, it being the desperate party. However, I was released the next day, obtained my mended shoe, and returned to the woods in season to get my dinner of huckleberries on Fair Haven Hill. I was never molested by any person but those who represented the State. I had no lock nor bolt but for the desk which held my papers, not even a nail to put over my latch or windows. I never fastened my door night or day, though I was to b

Make sure any throwback is fully immunized (2)

wherrera (235520) | about 2 years ago | (#42637405)

There's been a lot of mutual adaptation of humans to their pathogens the last 10k years that Neandethals would lack. Might mean they'd die easily of common benign infections, of less likely not get them at all.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?