The structure of their jaw et al suggests that they may not have been able to communicate as effectively as we can though.

However, if the technology did exist to clone one successfully, then surely a lot of our concerns could be answered? Should it not at least be attempted once for that reason alone? If it did work we would then have some basis of understanding with which to form a moral and ethical opinion? And if we did kill them off (we don’t know) then would we not have a moral obligation?

As it stands this whole debate is founded almost entirely on media driven hype and baseless assumptions. Lets look to science to put some flesh on it (no pun intended)

I also feel people underestimate the possible value of this, if it were successful. Not only could their physical existance teach us about medical science and history, but if they were more intelligent and could learn how to communicate with us, perhaps they could make some significant scientific advancements of their own, once they had been gifted our education. All just imagination of course, but if there is one thing we know; humans have always been driven to ‘know’ and this has led our advancement. Lets not stop now, we’ve gone too far and need to continue this path in order to survive the natural changes in the planet, let alone our own destruction of it.

Quote #2:
“Although, maybe the Chinese could do it?”

Quote #3:
“As for the Chinese, If we see that they are doing genetic research on Neanderthal lines, it is in our national interest to keep ahead of them. If we could utilize the strength and intelligence of Neanderthals as soldiers, think of the millions of human lives we could save.”

Wow, isn’t it funny how people seem to be perfectly fine with associating “The Chinese” with planning some shady operations in order to take over the world, etc.

As a Chinese person I am very offended. Mind you that not all Chinese are evil bastards like what you see in the Dr. Fu Manchu stereotype. We are human, just like you.

Shame.

“You create new life forms, about which you know nothing at all. You create many of them in a very short time, you never learn anything about them, yet you expect them to do your bidding, because you made them and you therefore think you own them; you forget that they are alive, they have an intelligence of their own, and they may not do your bidding.” -Ian Malcolm

What if you create a Neanderthal who’s a psychopath? What if you create one who is intelligent enough to not want to take part in your science experiment? What if you create a Neanderthal who has no immunities to any of today’s diseases? What if in the process, you create thousands of Neanderthals that are born with tremendous birth defects, and have to live out a miserable life in the name of “Hey, why not? It’s not like we have anything better to do today.”

It’s been argued in another article about cloning mammoths that if the argument for doing something is “No bad consequences — why not?” you still don’t have an actual reason FOR doing it.

Also, if Mark from the comment section’s post is correct, and Neanderthals end up looking like this: http://themandus.org/what_they_looked_like.html do you really think it’ll be easy as pie for people to accept them? You’d probably have more luck getting a chimpanzee (provided it had increased intelligence) accepted as a human being. Chimps don’t fall into the Uncanny Valley. That does.

And “with no culture, no peers, ” yadda yadda, so what? How do you think those with very high IQs feel? Or others who similarly fall far outside the “norm” and have the capacity to understand that? There are many ways to “have no peers” and feel utterly alone, even as a human being. Hence the popularity of that as a recurring theme in literature. And “caught between a human being and a zoo animal?” We really dont know how intelligent they are, so thats just a possibility, not a certainty. And there are already plenty of human examples of people caught between being a zoo animal and a human, barely able to cope with what we call “civilization.” (And Im not even talking about those who are born with genuine intellectual handicaps or congenital conditions whom we also manage to handle with some compassion) As long as the Neanderthal was given the same rights as humans, up front, and had an actual “family” (presumably the surrogate) to act as guardian and advocate, and ensure his/her well being, I dont see why we should not.

Certainly those people are scarey. And Neanderthal persons are scarey too, simpely because they are very different and uncivilised. Yet I do assume that if a young (child) Neanderthaler person would be adopted by people and treated in a good way the result could be very satisfying. Provided people WOULD be able to provide that girl or boy with equal rights. Are people really ready for that big a step?

Will that be the next sort of cheating in the Olympics by countries determined to get medals?

As for the Chinese, If we see that they are doing genetic research on Neanderthal lines, it is in our national interest to keep ahead of them. If we could utilize the strength and intelligence of Neanderthals as soldiers, think of the millions of human lives we could save.

Jesus spoke of slaves in the Bible, yet never condemned slavery. If God condones the subjugation of men, why not beasts? We cry Crocodile tears for nature as we deplete all of it’s resources, why not create resources when we can?

Tell me, though…

Does man, that marvel of the universe,that glorious paradox who has sent me to the stars,still make war against his brother, keep his neighbor’s children starving?

I’m just sayin’.

If ethical people are going to decide what society is able to do or not do, then they should learn more of science…a great deal more…please

I’ve always wondered, too, how much the clone and the original would think alike.

We’re oh-so-delicate when it comes to these hypothetical “ethical questions” regarding scientific advances, but we have no problem at all with murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent bystanders in real war, right here and now.

Oh, but that’s just collateral damage, and we don’t have to think about that. That’s not like, you know, an ETHICAL question, that’s just war. Yeah. ”

I don’t think this is so much a question for Discover as it is for world governments. All of them.

I think some of them and their traits slipped in with the human population. I have seen people (for some reason, mostly in small towns in the middle of nowhere) that look like them.

I just want to live to see “Win a date with a Neanderthal” on Fox, or how about “Guess which one’s the Neanderthal”? In that one you have 30 seconds in a dark room to grope and make out with the rooms 3 occupants- which one’s a Neanderthal?

We’re oh-so-delicate when it comes to these hypothetical “ethical questions” regarding scientific advances, but we have no problem at all with murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent bystanders in real war, right here and now.

Oh, but that’s just collateral damage, and we don’t have to think about that. That’s not like, you know, an ETHICAL question, that’s just war. Yeah.

When the subject of cloning pets comes up in the news occasionally, I’m amazed at the number of people who leap into the discussion with 100 percent negative opinions. They instantly come up with the stupidest damned ideas about it, with no apparent process of thought beyond what they remember seeing in some cheap science fiction movie.

My point is: REALLY examine the idea, the possibilities negative AND positive, before blowing off your mouth as if you’re some deep thinker rather than a church lady bobble-head.

Just because you can s*** out your two paragraphs on “ethical questions,” don’t pretend you’ve done some sort of deep analysis worthy of planning the possibilities of our future.

[Moderator's note: edited the cuss word.]

We could just clone parts of them at a time, no brains, that would give us plenty to study and should skirt most legal and ethical issues associated with the practice.