Interesting but unethical Hybrid attempt.

Yep, I agree with Karen on this one.
With snakes, I think, IN MY OPINION just shouldn't be mixed, because I disagree with hybridization, unless it is a naturally occuring integrade.

I'm not going to re-hash the whole "mutts" issue, it's been done on a couple of other threads lately....and I think you missed the whole point of what I said anyway. It takes YEARS of careful select breeding to create a TRUE new breed. One generation does NOT constitute a "new" breed.

Several new species of chickens are created each year... how does this happen? They sure dont find them in the wild.

Uh, again, I'm not sure what you are talking about here......(and yes, I raise chickens too) but I don't think there are any new SPECIES of chickens..... Now if you were talking crossbreeding a chicken with, say....a DUCK, that would be cause for concern, wouldn't you say?

I think the ethical thing to do here is breed them, if you produce offspring, breed them to each other and back to one of each species. Record the findings, put them on ice and more on.

So you think people should be producing animals just to kill them??? Yeah, that makes a LOT of sense to me.

Originally Posted by Cat_72

It takes YEARS of careful select breeding to create a TRUE new breed. One generation does NOT constitute a "new" breed.

In your openion. What does make a new breed? I say when you cross a line such as breeding different subspecies. So in my definition, it only takes one generation for a new breed. Now it could take many generations to refine a subspecies. IMHO.

Originally Posted by Cat_72

Uh, again, I'm not sure what you are talking about here......(and yes, I raise chickens too) but I don't think there are any new SPECIES of chickens..... Now if you were talking crossbreeding a chicken with, say....a DUCK, that would be cause for concern, wouldn't you say?

Perhaps what I ment was subspecies. Again, what makes a new species? Even if it is a hybrid, isnt it still a new species? Perhaps it is only a new species if the hybrid is fertial and able to reproduce. If you raise chickens you know how many different kinds of chickens are out there. Maybe we dont call them different species, they are sub species... or breeds? Really after looking into this.. the answer to where does a new species come from really depends on your views on evolution and many other theroies. I am not about to touch that. My views are likely differnet from yours. So lets drop this part of the conversation and agree to dissagree.

Originally Posted by Cat_72

So you think people should be producing animals just to kill them??? Yeah, that makes a LOT of sense to me.

Well really that was my openion and how I would go at it if it was research. Perhaps the person creating the hybrid is doing it for profit... of course the animal would not be youthonized. Ok, maybe you dont share my views on youthonization, there are other methods, and I dont know that I would ever just youthonize them after that much work, but that statment stemed from the thought that you would not breed the offspring or offer them to the public in a condition that they could breed. The only 2 ways to see that happens is to have them sergically fixed/altered or youthonized. AGAIN, IMHO, that and $4 will get you coffe at starbucks.

Well really that was my openion and how I would go at it if it was research. Perhaps the person creating the hybrid is doing it for profit... of course the animal would not be youthonized. Ok, maybe you dont share my views on youthonization, there are other methods, and I dont know that I would ever just youthonize them after that much work, but that statment stemed from the thought that you would not breed the offspring or offer them to the public in a condition that they could breed. The only 2 ways to see that happens is to have them sergically fixed/altered or youthonized. AGAIN, IMHO, that and $4 will get you coffe at starbucks.

I didn't necessarily disagree with your method of euthanasia, I disagreed with your reasons. I simply fail to understand the point in creating a life only to end it, for your own curiousity of what will happen. If not for profit.....what is your motivation? Breeding something such as this Ball Python/Burmese hybrid would not happen in nature....what useful information would you gain from it?

Science-Find something new, study it, feed it, breed it, inject it, mutilate it, kill it, study it some more.

Personally I am not into hybrids, I do not think electrical/gas cars are worth the money, nor will they save on pollution. According to environmental nuts cows are producing more pollution than cars do.

I think if it is a couple of species that are from the same region on earth than hybridization is possible(surinam boas x columbian boas), but when mixing two species that would never have met because of a mass of water and land space(ball python x jungle carpet python), those two breeding would never happen. Someone stated that these people are playing God, yeah maybe so. He wants a new species of snakes, it may happen it may not. We will find out though.

My 2 cents

Hybridizing is not really science. There are already as many definitions of species as there are flavors of jelly beans, and no experimentation is needed to arrive at those definitions, the natural world has already done that for us. So if everyone could please stop saying that they're hybridizing for science's sake, or that science just wants to see what will happen, that would be great. Please inform yourself.

Also, junkyard, I've never seen acid rain downwind from bovine herds. Methane isn't the most fun substance in the world, but it's certainly not as toxic as smog is either. Boa constrictor is the species, and there are different locales that are subspecies... everyone in science has agreed that members of the same species should be able to interbreed, and they do. When subspecies produce offspring together, that's called an intergrade - it is NOT the same thing as a hybrid.

Originally Posted by sirenofthestorm

Hybridizing is not really science. There are already as many definitions of species as there are flavors of jelly beans, and no experimentation is needed to arrive at those definitions, the natural world has already done that for us. So if everyone could please stop saying that they're hybridizing for science's sake, or that science just wants to see what will happen, that would be great. Please inform yourself.

Hmmm, science is what you make it. You mean to tell me that if I want to breed two things and see what the out come its not science? Is it history? Perhaps Math... no I really think its grammar (a subject I never did well in SORRY!).

Originally Posted by crazydart

Hmmm, science is what you make it. You mean to tell me that if I want to breed two things and see what the out come its not science? Is it history? Perhaps Math... no I really think its grammar (a subject I never did well in SORRY!).

Good call. Isn't science any kind of natural inquiry someone would have? Such as, breeding different species to see what happens?
I personally just don't like hybridizing snakes. I like them the way they are.

And, Siren, Ben never said that he himselve believes that cows are the cause of a lot of pollution, he was reffering to a group of people. Mostly veagans, who are just using it as an argument to rid of cows which are a major contributer to the meat products in the world.

I know this is kind of off-topic, but I couldn't resist-
http://www.greenapple.com/~jorp/amzanim/crossesa.htm

"just cause I wanted to see what would happen" isn't a hypothesis. Didn't yall learn what the scientific method was in grade school?

Gah.