Normally, I’m pro-science, and I’m generally in favor of experimentation, even if there’s some risk, and I don’t think we should reject new concepts just because they seem kind of gross and offensive in some way we can’t quite put our finger on, but this is a step too far.
This is like The Island of Dr. Moreau or Jurassic Park and those movies never end well. A professor at Harvard, Dr. George Church, thinks he can “clone” a Neanderthal, although it wouldn’t actually be cloning, since we don’t have an existing Neanderthal to work with, just a bit of gene modification. He reckons he’s got the Neanderthal DNA pattern figured out and all he needs is a surrogate mother or two willing to carry a Neanderthal baby to term and there you go.
Actually, that part won’t be a barrier, because there are certainly women who would do that, if the money was right. There might even be some willing to do it for the sake of science.
There’s no shortage of ethical barriers, though. Creating a new species just so we can study them, and point at them, and keep them in zoos, and maybe have some weird science experiments where people mate with them, is all screwed up.
Of course, people had intra-species sex on Star Trek all the time, and if it was Human-Bajoran, or Human-Vulcan, or Human-whatever species Deeanna Troy was, it was O.K. But the idea of sex between Humans and Ferenghis is pretty repulsive. Sure, they are a bipedal, intelligent species but it’s still bestiality.
There’s also one little flaw in the experiment. Say Dr. Church is successful in breeding a “Neanderthal,” according to the genomic map he’s designed – how do we know it’s actually a Neanderthal? How do we know it’s not a slightly mistaken version of a Neanderthal?
Also, if the idea is to alter DNA so we can somehow improve the human species, why not start small? Just start designing genes that will make us a little smarter, a little healthier, a little better.
Becoming more like Neanderthals is not really that attractive a goal.
