PM_ME_FAT_ENBIES@lib.lgbt to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2 years agoincest cloneslib.lgbtimagemessage-square27linkfedilinkarrow-up1226arrow-down122
arrow-up1204arrow-down1imageincest cloneslib.lgbtPM_ME_FAT_ENBIES@lib.lgbt to Memes@lemmy.mlEnglish · 2 years agomessage-square27linkfedilink
minus-square30p87@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up5·2 years agoAlso, twins aren’t identical copies either. Different fingerprint etc.
minus-squareGreyEyedGhost@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up5·2 years agoFingerprints aren’t genetically coded, and clones wouldn’t have the same fingerprints, either.
minus-square30p87@feddit.delinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down2·edit-22 years agoI 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-up2·2 years agoThe 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?