I wondered that too.

She's not tehcnically a Wolvie clone, she's a girl created using Wolverine's DNA...............

"She's not tehcnically a Wolvie clone, she's a girl created using Wolverine's DNA..............."

"John Valentine said:

"She's not tehcnically a Wolvie clone, she's a girl created using Wolverine's DNA..............."

Pssst. That is technically a clone."

I call 'em like I sees 'em. They call her a clone since her inception, that's what I call her. The term clone is used to describe many things, especially in the world of fiction (and comics in particular). Every reference to her origin ever refers to her as "a female clone of Wolverine". She is genetically identical except for one chromosome. It's like if they created a clone with Down Syndrome or something. She's not like his daughter because all of her DNA comes from him.

"I call 'em like I sees 'em. They call her a clone since her inception, that's what I call her. The term clone is used to describe many things, especially in the world of fiction (and comics in particular). Every reference to her origin ever refers to her as "a female clone of Wolverine". She is genetically identical except for one chromosome. It's like if they created a clone with Down Syndrome or something. She's not like his daughter because all of her DNA comes from him."

Yea so....ummmmm....IBL.

"Yea so....ummmmm....IBL."

"Sovereign Vance said:

"Yea so....ummmmm....IBL."

IBL? What does that mean?"

"John Valentine said:

"Sovereign Vance said:

"Yea so....ummmmm....IBL."

IBL? What does that mean?"

If I tell you i'll get banned."

I'm serious.

"I'm serious."

I agree John she is a girl who they overrote her origenal DNA, she was born from Sarah Kinney and so she is a girl and not a real clone a clone is somthing that is created not given birth to
John Valentine said:

"She's not tehcnically a Wolvie clone, she's a girl created using Wolverine's DNA..............."

Clones are inserted into surrogate mothers. That is how they are born. Kinney didn't contribute any DNA to X.

"Clones are inserted into surrogate mothers. That is how they are born. Kinney didn't contribute any DNA to X."

was it just me or she very relief on thought of sucide when the virus is inside of her?

It's not just you.

Laura has green eyes, an attribute of her mother Sarah. If Sarah didn't contribute any DNA, how do you account for Laura's green eyes? (Logan's are blue.)

"Laura has green eyes, an attribute of her mother Sarah. If Sarah didn't contribute any DNA, how do you account for Laura's green eyes? (Logan's are blue.)"

Green eyes could be a recessive trait in the Howlett family.

Anyway, human clones are real people.

What about mutant ones? I think the idea was that Sinister's clones were shadows of the people they were originally. They may have diminished brain capacity, increased aggression, other traits that Sinister coded into them. They are more like a genetic soup that was left standing. And certainly they have no souls.

By human I meant human, mutant, meta, martian, whatever.

I don't believe there is such a thing as souls either, but that's a philosophical debate I don't want to get into.

I would say that the sinister clones, regardless of what was encoded into (or out of) them would qualify as people. Someone with a birth defect isn't less of a person because of it, correct? The difference between Elixer and the rest of the team is a working conscience.

Logan has a working conscience. So does Thunderbird. I would argue the only one who doesn't is X-23 and possibly Warren as Archangel. Certainly Wolfsbane does, she's even deeply religious and obviously repentant. I would say those clones weren't people, as they were probably minutes/hours old, and are programmed with memories and all that. In other words, they aren't real people.

Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but which other Marvel characters would you consider to be "clones" or "real"?  Madelyne Pryor?  Professor X?  Cassandra Nova?  I'm not so sure about the various Spider-Man clones, but I know there was Scarlet Spider & Gwen Stacy.  

"Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but which other Marvel characters would you consider to be "clones" or "real"?  Madelyne Pryor?  Professor X?  Cassandra Nova?  I'm not so sure about the various Spider-Man clones, but I know there was Scarlet Spider & Gwen Stacy.  

When do you think a clone stops being just a clone and becomes a "real" person?

"

"Green eyes could be a recessive trait in the Howlett family.

Anyway, human clones are real people."

"xerox-kitty said:

"Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but which other Marvel characters would you consider to be "clones" or "real"?  Madelyne Pryor?  Professor X?  Cassandra Nova?  I'm not so sure about the various Spider-Man clones, but I know there was Scarlet Spider & Gwen Stacy.  

When do you think a clone stops being just a clone and becomes a "real" person?"

I believe that
Cassandra Nova and Xavier are twins, though they are not identical so their genotypes must be different from one another: as such, they are not clones.

"xerox-kitty said:

"Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but which other Marvel characters would you consider to be "clones" or "real"?  Madelyne Pryor?  Professor X?  Cassandra Nova?  I'm not so sure about the various Spider-Man clones, but I know there was Scarlet Spider & Gwen Stacy.  

When do you think a clone stops being just a clone and becomes a "real" person?

"

I believe that
Cassandra Nova and Xavier are twins, though they are not identical so their genotypes must be different from one another: as such, they are not clones.

Slinger said:

"Green eyes could be a recessive trait in the Howlett family.

Anyway, human clones are real people."

I believe that the allele coding for green eyes is the dominant form of the gene, whereas the allele coding for blue eyes is recessive."

"John Valentine said:

"xerox-kitty said:

"Not to go off on too much of a tangent, but which other Marvel characters would you consider to be "clones" or "real"?  Madelyne Pryor?  Professor X?  Cassandra Nova?  I'm not so sure about the various Spider-Man clones, but I know there was Scarlet Spider & Gwen Stacy.  

When do you think a clone stops being just a clone and becomes a "real" person?"

I believe that
Cassandra Nova and Xavier are twins, though they are not identical so their genotypes must be different from one another: as such, they are not clones.

I remember Xavier being cloned from his own DNA after he had originally been infected by the Brood (he was then able to walk for some time).  And Cassandra Nova's page here on CV says "In order to compensate for her lack of a body, she copied the DNA of Charles Xavier, her brother, in order to create her own body", which sounds like she's a clone of Xavier's altered DNA, in the same way that X-23 is a clone of Wolverine's altered DNA.

Yet they're two characters who no-one questions as 'just being a clone'.  So I'm curious to see whether others consider them (or ANY other Marvel characters) as clones or "real".

"

No-one seems to be arguing the logic there, so I guess most people agree.  

"No-one seems to be arguing the logic there, so I guess most people agree.  

I guess the context of the "they're not real" quote can be placed with the type of clones that X-Force were facing i.e. the intellectually reduced Marauders farmed en massed as opposed to the more character driven like Maddy Pryor, etc.  And not to dismiss the quality of writing, but I doubt that a Marvel script writer put as much emotional consideration or self-hate into a throw away one-line comment.  I suspect it was more of a moral justification for the massive hack & slash fest ;)

"

"No-one seems to be arguing the logic there, so I guess most people agree.  

I guess the context of the "they're not real" quote can be placed with the type of clones that X-Force were facing i.e. the intellectually reduced Marauders farmed en massed as opposed to the more character driven like Maddy Pryor, etc.  And not to dismiss the quality of writing, but I doubt that a Marvel script writer put as much emotional consideration or self-hate into a throw away one-line comment.  I suspect it was more of a moral justification for the massive hack & slash fest ;)

"

So.............there is new light on this topic. Read up.

What are you referring to, Hawk?

"What are you referring to, Hawk?"

Not much new light if you ask me. Laura is real, the other clones... weren't? Certainly no one cared about them or their deaths. You're nobody 'til somebody loves you, hmm? Elixir needs to start killing or get out of X-Force though.

"Not much new light if you ask me. Laura is real, the other clones... weren't? Certainly no one cared about them or their deaths. You're nobody 'til somebody loves you, hmm? Elixir needs to start killing or get out of X-Force though."

That was definitely the question we're meant to be pondering. Laura deemed herself expendable, probably in part because of the "They're not real!" comment, but her psyche isn't exactly a stone pillar anyway. I think (hope) this is a hint that Laura's humanity will be called into question further and it will be used to give her some real character (perhaps help restore some of that New X-Men personality).

"That was definitely the question we're meant to be pondering. Laura deemed herself expendable, probably in part because of the "They're not real!" comment, but her psyche isn't exactly a stone pillar anyway. I think (hope) this is a hint that Laura's humanity will be called into question further and it will be used to give her some real character (perhaps help restore some of that New X-Men personality)."

Also consider what Logan told her about Rahne being more important than Logan and Laura earlier in the series, and her ritual scarification afterwards (which is a call back to NYX).

"Also consider what Logan told her about Rahne being more important than Logan and Laura earlier in the series, and her ritual scarification afterwards (which is a call back to NYX)."

In Angels and Demons (the first arc in this volume of X-Force) Logan stresses than Rahne is more important than either of them because of her innocence, etc.

"In Angels and Demons (the first arc in this volume of X-Force) Logan stresses than Rahne is more important than either of them because of her innocence, etc."

No.

The term clone is used to describe a genetically identical organism, which X-23 is not.

She's more like his artifially created genetic daughter."

"John Valentine said:

No.

The term clone is used to describe a genetically identical organism, which X-23 is not.

She's more like his artifially created genetic daughter."

She is a clone and CLONES ARE LAME!

If she had been an embyio of silver fox and wolvies stuff then it would had been acceptable.

But CLONE?¿ hahaha NO NO NO NO!!!"

You're insignificant, go away.
It's been explained why she's not a clone. END OF."

According to her mother she is a genetic twin. Not a clone.

Laura "looks" too much like Sarah and Debbie Kinney to not be related to them.  If Kinney did use some of her genetic code in designing X-23, regardless of the way she was conceived she would be a child of Logan and Kinney and not a clone.  She would be a designer baby rather than natural one.

This thread is a total waste.Even if Daken and LK were clones...it doesn't mean they aren't real...