Introduction. The Arctic is located in the uppermost region of the northern hemisphere. The region consists of of the area around Greenland, USSR, Canada and Alaska (refer to appendices Fig.1). The Arctic is mostly covered by frozen ice all year long. This region also surrounds the Arctic Ocean. So far the Artic is a naive environment, humans have not yet fully explored the region. But as people search for the resource, more and more people will move into to the area to take what they can, this can tip the balance of the environment, resulting in pollution and destruction of this once perfect environment if the proper management steps are not in place ahead of the rush. Physical Geography The Arctic region is located across seven countries and covers an area of 10.4 million square miles, in which Siberia covers eight million square miles, which is bigger than Canada and the United States combined. One third of Canada is within the Arctic, among it over 1.2 million square miles are taiga and tundra, and 0.7 million of it is the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. Greenland covers 0.8 million square miles. Alaska covers 0.6 million square miles. Sapmi is the region where the indigenous people in Scandinavia lives, it occupies the smallest area with approximately 0.3 million square miles. Polar climate describes the Arctic, which means much of this area has a freezing cold climate and covered with ice all year. Harsh winters, low temperatures, and little snow or rainfall characterizes the arctic climate. In winter the days are shorter because the North Pole faces away from the sun, the sun does not set till midsummer and it is only strong enough to warm the top layer of the earth. Three feet below the surface the ground stays frozen. Frozen ground, called permafrost,...
pages: 9 (words: 2385)
In the realm of medical science, there have been and still are many different technological innovations, which lead to great controversy. Things such as abortion, artificial insemination, and even certain kinds of surgery that have proven successful for humanity have gone through much debate. Today, one of the hottest topics to be debated, just so happens to be one of these technological innovations. It is something that people tend to be either fore or against and not in-between. Human cloning, this current break through, is being discussed worldwide and is advancing in its use everyday. Many people, including myself, disagree with most types of cloning because it contradicts their beliefs. Because there still are those that push for its advancement it truly is becoming one of the largest controversies of our time. Thorough out my life, I have developed beliefs that are based on what the Bible teaches us. Because of this, I have to disagree with any practice of human cloning. The cloning of animals and plants on the other hand do not bother me and I see nothing wrong with it. Since we are given the domain in the Bible to rule over the world, which are the animals and plants, the cloning of these things to help humanity survive is all right. The video that was presented in class on cloning gave many different world-views in support on cloning and only a few in opposition of it. The one argument that I did agree with was from Russell Saltzman, a Lutheran reverend. The reverend could have benefited from therapeutic cloning but refused to take part in this sort of technology because of his beliefs taken from the Bible. He argued that in creating the embryo for this, he would be creating a life and then killing it simply for...
pages: 3 (words: 672)
Human cloning becomes more and more controversial now that the scientists are technologically ready to undertake this revolutionary step in human reproduction. There are many proponents of human cloning who find justifying arguments. They argue that cloning would alleviate trauma and grief for people who lost someone close in an accident because a "replacement" could be created. Further, infertile couples could use cloning techniques to have children. Next, human cloning would terminate genetic faults in people. Additionally, people who want an image of them to live on forever could preserve their life in clones of themselves. Human cloning in general would contribute to research and experiments on human body and scientific limits. Cloning could also become a new source of economic activity. The arguments to the contrary include equally strong ideas. First, cloning humans is ethically questionable because it may have unpredictable social and psychological consequences. Second, a cloned individual would be genetically identical to the cloned individual, but she/he would not be the same as the cloned individual to replace her/him. Moreover, cloning is illegal in the US. The opponents of human cloning insist that no scientist should do everything she/he CAN do. There are certain ethical boundaries for scientists to abide by. They should not do things to harm other people in any way especially that scientists' knowledge and abilities could be dangerous to human race. A situation who-CAN-do-what could create an unhealthy competition among the scientists, who would care more about their personal benefit and fame than about the benefit of humanity. In the light of controversy on human cloning, past and current findings in this field elicit many ethical questions for future research. The idea of human cloning takes its beginnings from animal cloning. The procedure of cloning is wildly understood as extracting a nucleus from one...
pages: 9 (words: 2433)
Since the birth of dolly- the famous cloned sheep- in 1997, and the world has still been struggling into several social, scientific, and religious debates regarding cloning. Dolly's cloning created a spontaneous reaction that exposed the idea of human cloning. Therefore, different authorities with diversified perspectives lead to numerous hesitative opposing points of view based on their background of moral and ethical images. These images are not just statements that are considered as virtues or rights; however, they are rather images of how virtues and rights stick together, and what they may perform to influence our positions in life (Burley, 1998, p.4). Such images construct the nucleus for the debate regarding human cloning in its miscellaneous perspectives. In addition to the issues of morality and ethics, the confusion of science with technology reveals, where they both must work coherently for the sake of humanity to serve the common good and not just for achieving mere individual desires and self-aggrandizing imperatives (Rantala, 1999, p.122). According to human cloning, the process acquires transferring DNA from the nuclei of a living cell into a human ovum, and then this embryo will be implanted into a woman's uterus (CNN, Jones). So, we are able to implement human cloning, but is it accurate to do it? Will there be any side effects that will threaten the world? Does implementing human cloning counter our social, scientific, and religious perspectives? In reply to the above questions, Dr. Panos Zavos, an American researcher, ignores all threats and states, "We intend to do this, and we do intend to do it right" (CNN, 2001 Jones). As a matter of fact, Dr. Zavos along with Dr. Severino Antinori, an Italian professor, intend to clone a human in November 2003. Regarding the mentioned issues, CNN TV made in February 1997 and in February 2001...
pages: 7 (words: 1820)
"A Chip Off the Old Cell" The actual process of cloning is nothing new. It began in the 1970s with the cloning of frogs. Scientists have cloned plants and animals for years since then. Recently, there have been continuing controversies regarding the process of human cloning, and whether or not our society has a use for it. On July 5,1996, scientist Ian Wilmut (after 277 attempts), created first born cloned mammal which was a healthy lamb by the name of "Dolly". A process called somatic nuclear cell transfer accomplished this task. For example, a cell is first taken from a donor female, then an unfertilized egg is taken from a second female, DNA from the cell is removed and transferred to the egg which is implanted into a surrogate mother, and finally the resulting baby is genetically identical to the original donor(The Human Cloning Process). Since this extraordinarily scientific breakthrough occurred there have been many reactions. March of 1997, President Clinton issued a moratorium banning the use of federal funds for human cloning for the following five years, giving the National Bioethics Board significant time to assess the risks of cloning and study ethical and social impacts. September of that same year, 64,000 biologists and physicians signed a voluntary 5-year moratorium on human cloning. January 1998, nineteen European nations sign a ban, and the FDA announces its authority to regulate human cloning (The Human Cloning Process). The controversy is still ongoing, but has made some progress within the recent years. People who are against human cloning state many logical concerns of its effectiveness and need in our society. The fear of the unknown takes a toll on the human psyche particularly on this issue. Lewis Thomas (1913-1993), a physician and scientist, states that his reasons for opposing human cloning is because "there...
pages: 4 (words: 985)
Banning on human and organ cloning is posing a problem on those educated ones in academia. Researcher and scientist Dr. Ian Wilmut has successfully cloned a sheep, and has gathered from this experiment evidence that strongly proves that human and organ cloning could be performed – safely and effectively. Unfortunately, our government has almost immediately banned such cloning in this country. Did they realize the benefits of such a discovery? Perhaps they simply believe that it is some sort of unethical, immoral experiment that is not beneficial to our society. Perhaps they should take a closer look at exactly what these researchers have derived from years of experimenting. In this paper, I will propose a possible plan to persuade our government to take another look at human and organ cloning. Many positive benefits could come out of this, and it is our responsibility, for the sake of a healthier future, to push policy makers to change their minds and loosen their grips on such a banning. Cloning of various organisms has been going on for years. This concept of cloning was conceived in 1938, but it was not until 1994 that a method using an embryo was used to clone a cow (Business Week). Much to many people's surprise, the idea of cloning humans is not an aged concept. It is fairly new, but that hardly means that the amount, or rather quality, of research to support safe human and/or organ cloning, is poor. This bioethical issue is quite debatable, and it has caused further debate, especially after the March 4, 1997 banning of the use of federal funds for research leading to human cloning (Time). The government was pressured. Due to time restrictions, they had to make a challenging decision on whether or not to ban human cloning in...
pages: 5 (words: 1299)
Through and through the annals of time, from one generation to another, there has always been overwhelming wonderment and mystery on the topic of cloning. Whether they thought it was ethically right or wrong, nearly every person that has lived a significant life has, one way or another, dreamed about what it would be like to have a double ¡V another human being that seemingly looks, acts, or possibly even thinks exactly the way they do. And as time passes by throughout each generation, evolution occurs. As a result of this, life as we know it advances to an entire new level. Everything from plants and animals, to our own physiques and minds, increases in its overall development. In our modern day, there is one thing in particular that has evolved at an alarming rate ¡V technology. With this on-going advancement of technology, the possibility of human cloning appears to be just around the corner. Major controversy has risen in spite of this, and rightfully so, as the possibilities, both good and bad, of human cloning are presumably endless. Everyone seems to have their own opinion on the subject of human cloning, including religious leaders, political figures, and modern society dwellers. Is human cloning right, or is it wrong? Although there is not a correct answer to that question, as it is solely based on opinion, I will, however, cover as much information as I possibly can in the following essay to attempt to enlighten your very own beliefs and opinions on the topic of human cloning. Before I proceed any further, you must understand exactly what cloning is. According to Human Genome Project researchers, cloning is ¡§the copying of genes and other pieces of chromosome to generate enough identical material for further study.¡¨ (www.ornl.gov) What this basically means, in others...
pages: 6 (words: 1640)
Background: Cloning involves removing the nucleus from the unfertilised egg of an organism and introducing this nucleus (which contains DNA) into an egg cell of another organism that does not contain a nucleus. Subsequently, this newly created cell is transplanted into another organism, producing an organism genetically identical to the original one. Benefits of human cloning include the fact that various diseases may become manageable, such as cancer and diabetes. However, there are also disadvantages related to human cloning, one of the biggest is the fact that people are seen to be uniquely created in the image, and by, God. It can be argued that we do not have the right to change the intentions of God in our society. Personally, I believe that the process of human cloning should be restricted to a certain extent. This, to my belief, could create conflict as to what restrictions must be placed upon the process, however if there is no remedy to the problem then it should be banned worldwide. Certainly there are positives involved with the process of human cloning, however I believe that the arguments against human cloning far outweigh the positive functions of it. Biological Relevance: Cloning entails isolating and reproducing deoxyribonucleic acid (DINA) from a donor, in order to create an organism that is genetically identical to the donor. The donor's DNA is introduced into a differentiated cell, which contains no DNA. Differentiation is a natural process, in which cells specialise into a certain kind of cell in order to perform specific functions. Differentiation is an extremely important process, because once cells from a recently fertilised egg differentiate, they "create" organisms. The process of cloning human embryos is extremely similar to the process of cloning animal embryos. In 1996, scientists were able to clone an adult sheep and named it Dolly....
pages: 8 (words: 1945)
A clone is defined as a cell; group of cells, or organisms that are descended from a single original cell. Scientist Ian Wilmut can be credited with cloning the first mammal, Dolly the sheep, in February of 1997. From that point on ethical issues on cloning began to erupt. Many people are against cloning; then again many people are for human cloning. I am personally not against human cloning and feel that human cloning should be explored. There are many misconceptions of human cloning today. One misconception according to Herbert, Sheler, and Watson is that, "A human clone would not be an exact copy of the person who provided its DNA, but rather would be sort of delayed identical twin, as much as a separate individual as any twin." This is an argument against human cloning and many argue this quote in their favor say that parents who wish to clone a deceased child will end up with a second child who appears to look like the first child yet differ in personality. Parents could possibly be traumatized and become depressed when they come to realize that their second is not an exact replica of the first born. Yet Ronald Bailey goes against this idea in his article "Research into Human Cloning Should Not be Banned". He states, "What would a clone be? Well, he or she would be a complete human being who happens to share the same genes with another person. Today, we call such people identical twins. To my knowledge no one has argued that twins are immoral. Of course, cloned twins would not be the same age. But it is hard to see why this age difference might present an ethical problem--or give clones a different moral status." Lee Silver from the article "Human Cloning is Ethical"...
pages: 3 (words: 684)
The announcement of the cloned ewe, Dolly, in 1997 by scientists in Scotland, was a shock to the entire world. The idea of cloning wasn't new, but at the time still seemed farfetched to most. As John Greeney stated "We had not, as a species, ever truly considered the likelihood that human reproduction would fall so fully under the hand of technology" (1). However, once the reality of this controversial practice set in, scholars and common people alike began to debate the pros and cons of cloning from one end of the globe to the other. With morals and ethics at the forefront of the debate, people were, and still are, quite divided, as those are touchy subjects of personal opinion. Governments around the world quickly echoed the squeamishness of the public as many countries enacted bans on experiments that used the cloning of human cells. The United States was no exception as the federal government enacted laws to ban all experiments that involve the cloning of human cells. However, it is clear that the cloning of human cells has become inevitable. In response, the United States should draft laws that only allow for therapeutic cloning and cloning for infertile couples, with an agency that will oversee all of these practices. If this were to occur, there would be a higher quality of life throughout the country. To start, the cloning of human beings appears to be inevitable. Scientists, doctors, and researchers around the world have been successfully cloning and manipulating animals for years as they wait for the moratorium on human cloning to come to an end. With each attempt at cloning animal cells, these doctors and scientists are learning more about cloning and developing hypotheses on how to apply their findings to humans. The only thing standing in their...
pages: 7 (words: 1719)