> Ok... twins are not clones. They do not have identical genetic make-ups.

Last I heard they do.

>And you know what happens with in-breeding don't you?

In-breeding is bad because it actually decreases genetic variation in a blood line. If two people have one kid, 50% the genes are lost. If those same two people have 2 kids, (approx) 25% of the variation is gone. If those children then breed and have two children, then (approx) 50% of the variation is gone from that generation compared to the two grandparents.

Now let's say those same two parents each have a clone of themselves instead. Then each of those clones has one clone. Then the two grandkids will have 100% of their parents genes. Of course if they clone clones instead, the variation will go down, but there is nothing inherent in cloning that guarantees lack of genetic diversity, it is all about how it is carried out.

> We NEED mutation for survival.

Mutation is not the word you are looking for.

> Look at Dolly the sheep - suspected advanced ageing and arthitis at a young age?

Yes, there are problems with the cloning process right now. I agree we should not clone humans yet. But these problems will eventually be overcome.

> To say that cloning is ok is just plain ignorant.

It is knee-jerk attitudes like that that I do not get. This is not a big deal, there is nothing that is inherently wrong with the idea of cloning. It can be misused, but can't everything?