“They’re clones! they’re not real!!”

  • 80 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by OUTSIDER40 (23 posts) - - Show Bio

x-force-20081121060242358.jpg

In X-force issue 9 the team is attacked in a clone farm of sinisters, Vanisher asks why Elixir is not fighting, Elixir said "I don't want to hurt  anyone" both Vanisher & X-23 tall him it is okay they're clones! they're not real", I know she destroyed  those embryos back at the facility but I had no idea she is a self hater, what is up with that?

#2 Posted by Hawk (15833 posts) - - Show Bio

I wondered that too.

#3 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio

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

#4 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio
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.
#5 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"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."
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.
#6 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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.

#7 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"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."


1) I know they call her a clone, but it's not strictly true..............

2) Wrong.
Her genotype also consists of DNA from Kinney.
#8 Posted by Sovereign Vance (735 posts) - - Show Bio

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

#9 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
Sovereign Vance said:
"Yea so....ummmmm....IBL."

IBL? What does that mean?
#10 Posted by Sovereign Vance (735 posts) - - Show Bio
John Valentine said:
"Sovereign Vance said:
"Yea so....ummmmm....IBL."

IBL? What does that mean?"
If I tell you i'll get banned.
#11 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
Sovereign Vance said:
"John Valentine said:
"Sovereign Vance said:
"Yea so....ummmmm....IBL."

IBL? What does that mean?"
If I tell you i'll get banned."

Huh?
#12 Posted by Sovereign Vance (735 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm serious.

#13 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
Sovereign Vance said:
"I'm serious."
That's lame.
#14 Posted by Talon/X23 (10489 posts) - - Show Bio

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..............."


 

#15 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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

#16 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"Clones are inserted into surrogate mothers. That is how they are born. Kinney didn't contribute any DNA to X."

I'm sure she did, though don't quote me. I'll have to re-read Target X and Innoncence Lost.
#17 Posted by bioghost (1245 posts) - - Show Bio

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

#18 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

It's not just you.

On the topic of X-23's clone status: She is not technically a clone, according to Innocence Lost, but Kinney did not contribute any DNA either. Laura is an almost-clone, due to the copying of 2 sets of the one X chromosome belonging to Logan, rather than having 2 different ones.
#19 Posted by Paragon (7293 posts) - - Show Bio

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.)

#20 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio
Paragon said:
"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.)"
One chromosome vs. 2. Males are XY. Females, XX. X-23 takes both her X chromosomes from Logan's one. I have blue eyes, but my mother does not. So the eye color is by no means any indication of Kinney's DNA being present in X-23. Not to mention the fact that Logan's eye color has changed over the years.
#21 Posted by Slinger (7640 posts) - - Show Bio

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

Anyway, human clones are real people.

#22 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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.

#23 Posted by Slinger (7640 posts) - - Show Bio

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.

#24 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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.

#25 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio

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?
Moderator
#26 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
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.
#27 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio
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".
Moderator
#28 Posted by Talon/X23 (10489 posts) - - Show Bio

#29 Posted by k2 (473 posts) - - Show Bio
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.

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."

This is correct. I just took a basic genetics course. Technically, a green-eyed clone shouldn't result unless the eye color is  sex-linked...if Logan's were green but he was heterozygous (Gg) capital G being dominant green
allele and lowercase g being recessive blue allele then if the creators of X-23 didn't care about eye color and used DNA from a sperm cell in an egg cell then a blue eyed clone would be possible (assuming the fertilized
embryo/zygote received a recessive blue allele from each donor)...but that's not how cloning works. Cloning is done from somatic (body) cells, not sex cells.

Hmmmm...

I agree with the mentality that Laura is her own person. She's not an exact clone, seeing as she is female and Logan is male; however, she is still a clone in every other way. I view her as a hybrid--better than Sinister's
creations but still not completely her own. What defines her as being X-23 are her experiences and the personality she's struggling to find.
#30 Edited by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
xerox-kitty said:
"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".
"
By definition, a clone is a genetically identical organism.

When an organism's DNA has been subject to alteration, the DNA is obviously no longer the same as it was originally.
An obvious point but, Cassandra is a woman: her DNA has to be, and is different from Charle's.

The same goes for X-23, her genotype has been altered from the inital sample of Wolvie's DNA: there no longer exists a Y-chromosone. Instead, she has two copies of an identical chromosome 23: thus her 23rd pair of chromosomes are simply a repition of Logan's X-chromosome.
X-23 is not technically a clone, as her DNA has been altered from Wolverine's DNA.

Charle's body was replicated and he is in a clone body, but he still possesses the same consciousness: he himself is not a clone, but his body is.
#31 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio

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 ;)
Moderator
#32 Posted by Vance Astro (91262 posts) - - Show Bio
xerox-kitty said:
"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 ;)
"
.....................
Moderator
#33 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
xerox-kitty said:
"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 ;)
"

Nobody is arguing it because it's irrelevant.
#34 Posted by Hawk (15833 posts) - - Show Bio

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

#35 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

What are you referring to, Hawk?

#36 Posted by Hawk (15833 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"What are you referring to, Hawk?"
X-force 10
#37 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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.

#38 Posted by Hawk (15833 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"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."
Elixir ....agreed.

Does Laura think she is real is the question......I don't know. Elixir seemed to think that's why she was tripping. lol
#39 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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).

#40 Posted by Hawk (15833 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"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)."
Yeah it makes a good plot line that she thinks of herself as a Sub human. She could think of herself as a killing machine and nothing more.
#41 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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).

#42 Posted by Hawk (15833 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"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)."
Ok now I'm lost......what book? Angels and Demons or this series?
#43 Posted by Korg (11931 posts) - - Show Bio

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.

#44 Posted by Hawk (15833 posts) - - Show Bio
Korg said:
"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."
Ok I'll have to go re-read that.......it's in the bathroom I think lol
#45 Posted by Suigetsu (1720 posts) - - Show Bio
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!!!
#46 Posted by John Valentine (16310 posts) - - Show Bio
Suigetsu said:
"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.
#47 Posted by Suigetsu (1720 posts) - - Show Bio
John Valentine said:
You're insignificant, go away.
It's been explained why she's not a clone. END OF."
No U.
Go back to your Nerdox forum, besides the origin I just wrote its bette than the wierd one and complicated one that has to be explained.

CLONE = LAME

Embryo = WIN!
#48 Posted by Giuseppe Riccadonna (2071 posts) - - Show Bio

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

#49 Posted by DrSumtincool (63 posts) - - Show Bio

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.



#50 Posted by Vance Astro (91262 posts) - - Show Bio

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

Moderator

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.