What animal could impregnate a human female, just wondering if this has been done yet or no

What animal could impregnate a human female, just wondering if this has been done yet or no

Just research “humonculus” if you haven’t done so already. There’s currently some Russian fuck whose created some weird being by injecting his load into a chicken egg. He’s had a few attempts but this more recent one seems to be living and developing and it even has an eyeball. I don’t know how legit it is, but his videos sure creep me out

wow I'm gonna search that

this, the videos are entertraining idk how to type powdajaiosjdjwd. It's worth watching

Tons of YouTube videos of his fucked up creatures that he hatches. He pulled one from the incubator and it spit “poison” on him, then it died shortly after. The videos honestly make me kind of sick

The freaky thing is there 1 animal and it gets weireder. It has happened more then a few dozen times.

but wait this can't be real

yeah, "died"

Sorry to burst all your bubbles but those videos were confirmed fake awhile ago. It's just magnetic colored clay inside the egg, which he moves with a magnet under a table or desk or whatever.

I kind of hope the videos are fake. If this Russian fuckwit can do experiments like this in his basement, just imagine what kind of monsters the government could create

...

None.

chimps? bonobos? pigs?

of course it's one of those third world youtuber that wants to get that sweet ad revenue by pulling cheap tricks

I WANT ANSWERS NOW. WE NEED A SCIENTIST IN THIS THREAD

Thing is if we could actually breed a human and another specie, we could legally enslave them

Stalin experimented with Gorillas and women - needless to say, it didn't work out. All of these experiment didn't work out in the end. Sorry to burst your bubble

I think if we still had neanderthals we could pull some shit but nah

I think you’re onto something Sup Forumsro. Let’s create a Bigfoot creature

Biofag here.

No, it's impossible to fecundate the ovocite II with sperm from another life form. You see, the membrane proteins are way too precise. That's a thing called recognition inter-membrane.

Key and lock. As simple as that. I think we humans have ZP4 as a protein of membrane.

...

I came in pancakes once, it didn't make anything.

THIS

There are too many inconsistencies between the DNA of humans and other animals for them to set off zygogenesis. This could change after loads of research and tests on CRISPRs, and even then it would be too inefficient to make anthros economically feasible.

Beat me to it.

Some faggot in 19th century france was obscessed with breeding human women and monkeys.

Thank you educated Sup Forumsros
It made some good ass pancakes

Yeah...and also you didn't ID yourself as biofag. Shame.

Is that how niggers were created

>stalin personally experimented with gorillas
Oi nah, it was some russian scientist at the time, Stalin then cut his funding and had him exiled/killed before he finished his research you fucking faggot.

So is it possible to temporarily cut open the membrane and put the sperm inside?

probs, aren't africans closer to monkeys ?

I honestly think a gorilla gave birth to a retarded and deformed baby in Africa, and that is what’s now known as the modern day nigger

Hey biofag, why don't humans evolve into different species

Not possible at all op learn to Duck

Scienon is that you

I think that would do the trick for several reasons.

1) once the key and lock le oppened, only then the mixture of pronucleus is possible. You need To trigger (feminists right?) the cascade of reactions in order to do the syngamie.

2) there is and there will always be an incompatibility of the number of chromosomes. The mixture mechanism will not function as a whole. You wont get a diploid dell....

I think it will be someday

"Would not do" sorry

Only niggers

Evolution as Darwin proposed it, it's not really related to us humans. We don't fit in the description of a "natural specie" because we don't adapt ourselves to the ambient. We adapt the ambient to us. We are the personification of natural selection. But not something put to the test of that force itself.

To discuss evolution of humans it's ont really a thing by darwin's ideas.
this is my way of seeing this.

Evolutionary biologist here. It's clear that anatomically modern humans successfully interbred multiple times with Neanderthals and another extinct human species (the Denisovans) in the last few hundred thousand years. However, there is evidence that the hybrid offspring may have had problems. Our closest living relatives are chimps, but we diverged from them 5-7 million years ago, and we have different numbers of chromosomes, which would probably prevent any chance of a successful pregnancy. Having said that, horses and donkeys can reproduce to produce mules (which are infertile), despite differences in chromosome number. So I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility that a chimp could impregnate a human.

How long exactly does it take one species to become two different species?

Biology professor here.
It would be technically feasible with shrews, as they have the same number of chromosomes as humans. That's really the biggest hurdle.


>We are the personification of natural selection. But not something put to the test of that force itself.
You obvioulsy don't know what you're talking about.

That is a tough question without a clear answer. Firstly, we need to clearly define what we mean by a species. Is it something that cannot produce fertile offspring? This is the most common definition of a species, but actually there are problems with this definition. Even things that we would clearly call separate species (e.g. lions and tigers) can mate if put in captivity. Does this mean that they are the same species? From an operational point of view, I would say that it is reasonable to call two lineages different species if they diverged more than one million years ago.

Not possible without serious re-writing of basic biology laws we know today. And even if we could go against scientific law, it doesn't guarantee the fetus would live past that stage.

Utter nonsense. It's not just about chromosome *number* but about how the chromosomes are arranged, the position of the centromere etc. Some shrews may have 23 pairs of chromosomes (although the number actually varies between 20 and 30 in the family as a whole), but there have been huge numbers of chromosomal rearrangements since humans and shrews last shared a common ancestor (which was >66 million years ago). They're not even in the same superorder, for God's sake. In conclusion, you don't know what you're talking about. I feel sorry for your students.