Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MeanWestTexan

"In vitro" is different from "in vivo" from "in the wild." (Seems the Romans were very civilized, no Latin for "in the wild.")


50 posted on 12/21/2004 9:27:37 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: Doctor Stochastic

"In vitro" is different from "in vivo" from "in the wild." (Seems the Romans were very civilized, no Latin for "in the wild.")"

Doesn't matter, be in IVF or mere artificial insemination (in vivo) ---- any artificial joining necessary for breeding means that animals are not the same species, per the definition.

Now, this is not the ONLY distinction for two species, which is to what I presume you are alluding.

For example, lions and tigers (unarguably two distinct species of cat) sometimes mate in zoos --- resulting in a Liger --- with no artificial help, other than being locked up together.

But, I am keeping the issue simple and not talking about all the other factors that go into defining a "species" --- as natural reproduction is necessary to be the same species.


59 posted on 12/21/2004 9:37:25 AM PST by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson