Part of the problem with Lisa Katayama's post is that it's clear she hasn't read the book. The clone was allegedly born in 1976, Rorvik approached the book's publisher in 1977 and the work was subsequently published in 1978. These aren't difficult dates to track, since the book makes mention of all of them and isn't so long that one might forget.

It is also untrue that scientists thought "the book was full of shit." Some decried the techniques described, but it's worthwhile to point out that the so-called African frog method of cloning was not the one ultimately used. Again, reading the book helps. In fact, those parts of the cloning process set out in the book are very similar to those used to clone Dolly the sheep and a number of scientific contemporaries in 1978 admitted that what Rorvik claimed was possible.

As In His Image points out, the technology existed even in the mid-'70s to achieve human cloning. What lacked was the will. And given that IVF was decried at the time as being unnatural, one can imagine the horror that greeted the very idea of cloning.

While In His Image is the very model of circumstantial evidence, it is compelling circumstantial evidence indeed. And assuming the child survived any accidents or illnesses that might have befallen him, there is as of this writing a 32-year-old human clone walking the Earth.

Sam

iknowAEIOU

BigViper

MarlboroTestMonkey7

geekgrrl

hageesheart

92BuickLeSabre

Trae

BoB...

Athaliah

josh42042

B

lightninglouie

92BuickLeSabre

willywag

Plague