X-23 a clone or not?

#1 Posted by Arad (5 posts) - - Show Bio

When you see this post, you may say.: "wow you´re a retard" or something like that. but heres the reason of my cuestion: As many know laura is officialy clasified as a "clone", but i have some reasons to say she´s not.
Here they are:

1. She had a mother: well, this reason cover a lot of "sub-reasons" for example the fact that she´s a woman (hot), that she looks a lot more to her mother than to wolverine (and that means theres some DNA combination in the process wich means shes not a clone*) [*sorry. lots of biology classes]  and that if she was a clone, her  cells would be 100 year something old, because (of a lot of scientifc shit). so the answer is yours, tell your opinnion.

#3 Posted by danhimself (22443 posts) - - Show Bio

just because she had a mother doesn't mean she's not a clone.  Doctor Mann in Y: The Last Man was giving birth to her own clone.  But at the same time due to the scientist manipulation of Wolverine's DNA so that they could produce a viable clone I would consider her more Wolverine's daughter than a clone

#4 Posted by John Valentine (16307 posts) - - Show Bio

I believe that Dr Kinney was only Laura's surrogate mother, so, they are not biologically related. As such any apparent similarites are only due to the artist's interpretation / drawing.
And no, she's technically not a clone, more like Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

#5 Posted by War Killer (20102 posts) - - Show Bio
@John Valentine said:
"I believe that Dr Kinney was only Laura's surrogate mother, so, they are not biologically related. As such any apparent similarites are only due to the artist's interpretation / drawing.And no, she's technically not a clone, more like Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. "

Try saying that five times fast
#6 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio
@John Valentine said:
" I believe that Dr Kinney was only Laura's surrogate mother, so, they are not biologically related. As such any apparent similarites are only due to the artist's interpretation / drawing.And no, she's technically not a clone, more like Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. "
I always thought she was more like his genetically engineered twin, since she's made purely of his DNA but with two X chromosomes.  Except a twin who is significantly younger than him...
Moderator
#7 Edited by John Valentine (16307 posts) - - Show Bio
@xerox-kitty said:
"@John Valentine said:
" I believe that Dr Kinney was only Laura's surrogate mother, so, they are not biologically related. As such any apparent similarites are only due to the artist's interpretation / drawing.And no, she's technically not a clone, more like Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. "
I always thought she was more like his genetically engineered twin, since she's made purely of his DNA but with two X chromosomes.  Except a twin who is significantly younger than him...
"
That would be accurate too, I just imagined her as his daughter due to their (rather warped :P lol) father-daughter like relationship.
#8 Edited by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio
@John Valentine: True true!  I still think of her as his daughter, really.  Mainly because of the age and the fact he keeps saying he's responsible for her.  I know Laura considers Sarah to be her mother, but she doesn't see Logan (the one she's actually genetically connected to) as her father... does she?
Moderator
#9 Posted by G'bandit (13689 posts) - - Show Bio
@War Killer said:
" @John Valentine said:
"I believe that Dr Kinney was only Laura's surrogate mother, so, they are not biologically related. As such any apparent similarites are only due to the artist's interpretation / drawing.And no, she's technically not a clone, more like Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. "
Try saying that five times fast "
O_O?

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. :P

#10 Posted by War Killer (20102 posts) - - Show Bio
@G'bandit said:
"@War Killer said:
" @John Valentine said:
"I believe that Dr Kinney was only Laura's surrogate mother, so, they are not biologically related. As such any apparent similarites are only due to the artist's interpretation / drawing.And no, she's technically not a clone, more like Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. "
Try saying that five times fast "
O_O?

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter.

Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. :P "
Lol! ...I knew someone would do that (GB)
#11 Posted by John Valentine (16307 posts) - - Show Bio
@xerox-kitty said:
"@John Valentine: True true!  I still think of her as his daughter, really.  Mainly because of the age and the fact he keeps saying he's responsible for her.  I know Laura considers Sarah to be her mother, but she doesn't see Logan (the one she's actually genetically connected to) as her father... does she?"
I'm not entirely sure whether or not X-23 considers Wolverine to be her father. She has been shown to care for him e.g. at the end of Messiah Complex when she cried out after he was eaten by Predator X - there is definately some emotional attachment, and he is the most fatherly figure she has. Moreover, Logan definately cares for her. As you said, he feels responsible for her; he was the one to take her to Xavier's, he didn't want her to join X-Force etc. There have been plenty of other moments to demonstrate this too but I can't think atm lol.
#12 Posted by Arad (5 posts) - - Show Bio

I also think that X-23 is more like  Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter than a clone, so seeing the answers you wrote. i can just earn 10 pesos from my sister, Another question How does comics deal with time? 

" @John Valentine: True true!  I still think of her as his daughter, really.  Mainly because of the age and the fact he keeps saying he's responsible for her.  I know Laura considers Sarah to be her mother, but she doesn't see Logan (the one she's actually genetically connected to) as her father... does she? "

#13 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio
@Arad said:
" I also think that X-23 is more like  Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter than a clone, so seeing the answers you wrote. i can just earn 10 pesos from my sister, Another question How does comics deal with time?
No, she is still a clone, created from his DNA.  If you read the
X-23: Innocence Lost mini series, then you'll understand it a bit better.

What do you mean about time?
Moderator
#14 Posted by John Valentine (16307 posts) - - Show Bio
@xerox-kitty said:
"@Arad said:
" I also think that X-23 is more like  Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter than a clone, so seeing the answers you wrote. i can just earn 10 pesos from my sister, Another question How does comics deal with time?
No, she is still a clone, created from his DNA.  If you read the
X-23: Innocence Lost mini series, then you'll understand it a bit better.

But she's not a clone. A clone is a genetically identical organism which X-23 is not. She would be at best  Wolvie's genetically engineered fraternal twin.
#15 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio

LOL, well I still see her as a clone-with-a-twist.  After all, she wasn't born from a typical sperm + egg relationship ;)

Moderator
#16 Posted by Arad (5 posts) - - Show Bio
@xerox-kitty said:
" @Arad said:
" I also think that X-23 is more like  Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter than a clone, so seeing the answers you wrote. i can just earn 10 pesos from my sister, Another question How does comics deal with time?
No, she is still a clone, created from his DNA.  If you read the
X-23: Innocence Lost mini series, then you'll understand it a bit better.

What do you mean about time?
"
Well About the innocence lost comic, i had read them and i understand your point, but I still stand by the opinion of being the:"Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter." or even a twin (jajaja and she is like 15-20 years old and her brother is like 150+ years) and what I meant with "time" is how can readers know how many years have past in the storyline, for example with the x-men and Xavier, the first issue of "uncanny x-men" was launched in 1963, and xavier was already in his mid 40s or something, and then you see him in "messahia complex" and he looks the same! so my question is: how do you know how much time has passed from issue to issue? 
#17 Posted by k2 (473 posts) - - Show Bio

Laura began out as a clone, but due to missing sequences in Wolverine's DNA (it was a damaged sample they were working with), she cannot be guaranteed to be 100% clone to begin with.

"For every enzyme, for every codon, for every sequence we repaired or brought back from near nothingness, we seemed to be missing a million more," wrote Laura's mother in the letter (from X-23: Innocence lost). Therefore, every part that they 'built back from near nothingness' runs a risk of not being an identical copy of Wolverine's genetic material. There is also the fact that she is female, which right away clarifies that she is not a clone. The eye color has been theorized to be caused by either a codon being rebuilt differently or linked to the X-chromosome. Perhaps Wolverine had some green-eyed women in his family (although Origins shows his mother as having blue eyes). Maybe Sarah even chose green eyes for her, as a little inside thing, because she felt (subconsciously) that Laura was her daughter, even though she denied it at first.

Laura is 17 years old. Wolverine is 120 years old (the events of Origins took place around 1890-1900; this can be estimated by dates shown on the tombstone of his brother, meaning the story had to take place sometime after). As for passing time, you can't know for sure. You can guesstimate. Sometimes the ages of the characters are mentioned. For example, Jubilee aged about 3 years in over a decade of real time. Perhaps Xavier's not aging is due to his body being healed? There may have been some body-switching in there, not sure.

#18 Edited by Treyvoni (33 posts) - - Show Bio

What I can say about Laura is that she is genetically unique. Therefore, technically she is not a clone, although she was created by way of a cloning process. This means that her DNA was placed inside of a denuclearized egg and inserted into a host environment whereupon she gestated and was born.

Assuming that no cross writing of her DNA happened prior to its insertion into the egg, there would be no cross contamination with the host (i.e. Sarah Kinney). However, that does not preclude Sarah Kinney from having used some of her own DNA to 'splice' into Laura. It is possible (and completely open for interpretation) whether or not she did. Arguements for and against include,

-Sarah was in a rush and working on it as a side project, rather than taking the time to rebuild a certain strand, she inserted an already complete on from a nearby donor worksheet (herself) and
-Sarah would have wanted Laura to remain as pure to the project as possible, aside from the fact that she is female, thus for the fetus to be accepted Laura is as genetically similar to Logan as Sarah was able to.

Other arguements do exist, the above are just what came to me.

From Encyclopedia Brittanica, a clone is:

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/122054/clone
#19 Posted by MrMiracle77 (1659 posts) - - Show Bio

It occurred to me the other day that X-23 happens to have almost the exact same origin as Namorita.  Clone, only female.

#20 Posted by Arad (5 posts) - - Show Bio
@MrMiracle77 said:
" It occurred to me the other day that X-23 happens to have almost the exact same origin as Namorita.  Clone, only female. "
mmm..... well it can be. I just don´t want to think of her like a simple clone..... oh valla en que dilema me he metido, bueno.... well can anyone else explain me about how they manage time in comic books?
#21 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio
@MrMiracle77 said:
" It occurred to me the other day that X-23 happens to have almost the exact same origin as Namorita.  Clone, only female. "
Namorita is a clone of her mother, Namora.  Not Namor.  She also has the genetics of various ancient Atlantean warriors, but not Namor.
Moderator
#22 Posted by MrMiracle77 (1659 posts) - - Show Bio
@xerox-kitty said:
"@MrMiracle77 said:
" It occurred to me the other day that X-23 happens to have almost the exact same origin as Namorita.  Clone, only female. "
Namorita is a clone of her mother, Namora.  Not Namor.  She also has the genetics of various ancient Atlantean warriors, but not Namor.
"

Wow.  That makes Namorita one step even creepier than X-23.
#23 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio
@MrMiracle77 said:
" @xerox-kitty said:
"@MrMiracle77 said:
" It occurred to me the other day that X-23 happens to have almost the exact same origin as Namorita.  Clone, only female. "
Namorita is a clone of her mother, Namora.  Not Namor.  She also has the genetics of various ancient Atlantean warriors, but not Namor.
"
Wow.  That makes Namorita one step even creepier than X-23. "
Namora couldn't have children, so she had her own genetics used to create a baby for her.  They added the DNA of ancient Atlantean warriors to make her a strong warrior in her own right.  Namora gave birth as any normal mother would, and no-one suspected anything until Namorita started to experience traumatic and aggressive mood swings.  This led to her skin turning blue (the first time) and I believe she was exiled from Atlantis because she was considered to be a clone.  Funny how many times they've let her back in to Atlantis even more times than she's changed skin colour :p
Moderator
#24 Posted by onigamegeek (17 posts) - - Show Bio

Well, technically in the Marvel universe she is a clone, due to her mother(Sarah Kinney) was actually her sarrogate mother. But on the other hand.... she may not be just a clone due to her sarrogate mother was the one who suggested a female clone of Wolverine to be created and she kicked off the project. But though Sarah was allowed to proceed with the procedure in bringing the 23rd sample to full development, Zander Rice had to be an ass and say she had to be the sarrogate mother to X-23 (supposedly due to insubordination) or her project was finished.
 
Yes in the beginning Laura does don some of Sarah's features, especially her green eyes, and they've stayed that way, so maybe some of Sarah's genes were passed on the Laura when she was in the womb. But overall a majority of her is Wilverine's DNA, technically... yes she's a clone... but by now, a clone means a virtual exact copy (same features, etc); but due to she's a female "clone" is probably another reason this was question was brought up.
 
Now if X-23 was a guy (if the y chromosome on Wolverine's DNA sample wasn't damaged) then yeah, you could call x-23 a thorough clone. But due to she's a female clone, the project that created her probably had to through in a few more genes so everything would work out. Or maybe something happened in the womb that gave Laura her green eyes.

#25 Posted by Ryonslaught (1247 posts) - - Show Bio
@War Killer said:
" @John Valentine said:
" Wolverine's genetically engineered daughter. "
"
Thats how i think about her........wolvie and sarah Kinney's genes mixed and brewed inside her= x23 
so yeah
#26 Edited by k2 (473 posts) - - Show Bio

 
http://www.sideshowtoy.com/videos.php?videoID=462\
 
Sideshow Collectibles interview with Craig Kyle on X-23. In it, he states that X-23 is basically Wolverine's sister, and is genetically engineered. She's not just Wolverine with girl parts; she's not a pure clone. She is strongly based on Wolverine but as a female version of him would be (example: the claws).
 
(Thanks to http://x-23-laurakinney.blogspot.com/ for bringing link to my attention).

#27 Edited by DoN`t_KrAnQ_jUsT_PsYcHoO (315 posts) - - Show Bio

i think wolverine has give her mother ( sarah kinney) just a sperm donor and she is the outcome a fighting mashine that manifest the healing faktor of her and the klaws which covered with adamantium ( really barbarous for a little girl ) but anything is distrupt me......
 
 
yes the klaw on her feet what the >>> is this comming from wolvie didnt hat anything like this 

#28 Posted by BoOMbOoMpOw (1711 posts) - - Show Bio

muhahahahahahahaha right where did the claws at her feet come from ? hahahaha ok i think the story of x-23 is very complicated i dont understand anything. they say wolvie is her father wich is understandable because of the claws the healing bla bla... but sarah kinney is her mother . wolvie and sarah kinney ???? and in the 100 % x-23 comic they show her real father too . aggghhhh I got a  bend  in my brain!!!!!!

#29 Posted by xerox_kitty (15762 posts) - - Show Bio
Moderator
#30 Posted by Treyvoni (33 posts) - - Show Bio
@onigamegeek said:
" [-snip-] Yes in the beginning Laura does don some of Sarah's features, especially her green eyes, and they've stayed that way, so maybe some of Sarah's genes were passed on the Laura when she was in the womb. [-snip-] Or maybe something happened in the womb that gave Laura her green eyes. "
I'm London to a brick that is not true. There is no genetic interchanging between  the infant in the womb and the owner of the womb. In fact, not even the mother's own blood crosses into the child (which is why children do not always have the same bloodtype of the mothers. If blood intermingling happened, then the child would die and the mother would be severely inconvenienced because of the incompatibility. Your statement if a biological infeasibility. 
 
In short, the true answer to this question is simple. "How do you want to define a clone?" because there are two ways to do this. 
 
1. Laura is the clone of Logan, because she was created out of his DNA and through the cloning process. (For language geeks out there, this is if you take the meaning of clone as a verb. Ergo, Laura is a clone (noun) because she was 'cloned' (verb- cloned both applies to that which is copied and the copy itself)
 
2. Laura is NOT the clone of Logan, because she was created out of his DNA but is not a perfect copy. (This is if you take the word clone to be a noun. Because she does not fit into the classification of the term clone, therefore she must be something else.)
 
In the end, it's a matter of language and what terms we want to couch the arguement in. Because both statements above are true, and Laura is not a perfect genetic copy of Logan but she was still made through the action/process of cloning. Now, it's only a matter of how you interpret it to mean whether or not she is a clone.
#31 Posted by Dark Cloud™ (2174 posts) - - Show Bio

Laura is a clone of Wolverine's genetic power-template, not exactly from his DNA. If that were true, she'd share many of his attributes -- especially at an infant age. During the first year of infancy, the child bares an almost striking resemblance to the father. Afterward, it shifts between both parents. Now, taking Wolverine's genetic power-template, Laura was created to be LIKE him, not BE him. Except, more vicious and cruel, and as an ASSASSIN-type character.

#32 Posted by Illyana Rasputin (2771 posts) - - Show Bio

Logan referred to Laura as his sister in the New X-Men.

#33 Posted by fbdarkangel (4884 posts) - - Show Bio

I like to think of Laura as Logan's daughter!

#34 Posted by Drift (26 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet (I don't feel like reading through the entire posting), but it's actually explained in the X-23 series, by Dr. Kinney.  I also don't feel like digging out my book collection to grace you with and actual quote from the book, but Kinney calls her not a clone but, for all intents and purposes, a genetic copy.  So... there you go.  :)

#35 Posted by bsmith1190 (90 posts) - - Show Bio

Wolverine's clone, Wolverine's daughter... any reason she can't be both?

#36 Posted by Kid_Omega_Prime (1244 posts) - - Show Bio

Ummm... I always thought that X-23 is a clone of Sarah KinneyAnd splised her DNA with Wolverine's X-Gen ?

#37 Posted by Hakudoushinumbernine (236 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine:

She the comic either innocence lost or the other one, stated that they were unable to replicate Logan's Dna to make another X-chromosome every time they tried the clone was unstable and would self terminate. Sarah Kinney devised the plan to use her OWN X-chromosome for the project. combining it with Logan's X chromosome. because of this Laura is TECHNICALLY not a clone regardless if whether or not Sarah Kinney was surrogate mother or not, she still used her own dna to help aid the Experiment thus no longer classifying Laura as a clone. now she's the child of Logan and Sarah. a clone specifies that the dna came from one person. a surrogate mother is only there to provide a place for the child to develop. the surrogate mother must be of a blood type that is compatible for the child she's growing for some one else.

if your girl was able to have children do to something being wrong with her uterus but not her eggs, doctors could use your sperm to fertilize the eggs and put them in someone else with a healthy uterus for the child/children to grow. the child born will not have the surrogate mother's.

Sarah Kinney wasn't simply surrogate, because she used her own dna and mixed it with the Dna of weapon x the child that came from it shouldn't be classified as a clone.

#38 Posted by Mercy_ (92674 posts) - - Show Bio

Craig Kyle and Christopher Yost (her creators and the team who have written the majority of her appearances including both her television and comic book origins) have gone on record as saying that genetically-speaking, she's closer to a sister than a clone.

Moderator
#39 Posted by John Valentine (16307 posts) - - Show Bio

@onigamegeek said:

Well, technically in the Marvel universe she is a clone, due to her mother(Sarah Kinney) was actually her sarrogate mother. But on the other hand.... she may not be just a clone due to her sarrogate mother was the one who suggested a female clone of Wolverine to be created and she kicked off the project. But though Sarah was allowed to proceed with the procedure in bringing the 23rd sample to full development, Zander Rice had to be an ass and say she had to be the sarrogate mother to X-23 (supposedly due to insubordination) or her project was finished. Yes in the beginning Laura does don some of Sarah's features, especially her green eyes, and they've stayed that way, so maybe some of Sarah's genes were passed on the Laura when she was in the womb. But overall a majority of her is Wilverine's DNA, technically... yes she's a clone... but by now, a clone means a virtual exact copy (same features, etc); but due to she's a female "clone" is probably another reason this was question was brought up. Now if X-23 was a guy (if the y chromosome on Wolverine's DNA sample wasn't damaged) then yeah, you could call x-23 a thorough clone. But due to she's a female clone, the project that created her probably had to through in a few more genes so everything would work out. Or maybe something happened in the womb that gave Laura her green eyes.

Ah, cool. It's been years since I've read Innocence Lost/Target X.

However, my description of her being Wolverine's genetically altered daughter still seems most accurate.

#40 Posted by Teerack (5714 posts) - - Show Bio

Like trying to argue Thor isn't a god lol.

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.