1

Being that Symbiotes live nearly forever and pass their minds on genetically and they don't want to die out, why didn't they just clone themselves or at least their queen to regrow their numbers?

I'm sure a new generation of Symbiotes along with humans that are looking to live longer and healthier the Tok'Ra and Human race should have looked into it. Same with the Jaffa.

Since this would have been beneficial to all why did none of them persue this path?

| improve this question | | | | |
  • Wasn't their queen dead long before that would've been an available plot? – Radhil Jul 18 '16 at 12:20
  • 1
    She died in season 6 ep10. Previous to that episode was every mention of cloning by Earthlings. So it would have been an option. Also, it is possible they could have interacted with the Asgard to get the tech. They could have also used a Sarcophagus on her without there being an effect which would have revived prolonged her life if she was needed to be alive to do so, but that's the thing with cloning, they don't need to be alive to clone them so it would have been possible after she was dead as well. – Durakken Jul 18 '16 at 12:31
  • 1
    not only that @Durakken, but the Sarcophagus can also bring things back from the dead. So I'm not sure why the Tok'Ra didnt use one. They say it saps the soul, but only on continued usage. – DubMan Nov 17 '16 at 14:52
2

Because the Goa'uld and the Tok'Ra were among the few races in this galaxy and the next that didn't even attempt to create any cloning technology, mostly because, as you say, as long as they have a new host every few hundred years, they have an indefinite lifespan.

Cloning in Stargate was attempted by numerous races, but even the most advanced, the Asgard, could not perfect the process. The only race ever to successfully clone a symbiote separately from its host was us, the Tau'Ri, but even then we don't know how long it would have survived, because it was destroyed shortly afterwards.

Ba'al was the only symbiote to ever clone itself along with its host, and that was only because he got ahold of some Asgard cloning technology.

In addition to the technological limitations, there was also the matter of pride. The Jaffa especially wanted to rid themselves of their dependancy on symbiotes, hence the introduction of Tretonin, and humans themselves, as Jack and Daniel stated, would not be particularly open-minded when it came to having a "Snake in their heads" (Most of them, anyway). So the issue of not having enough willing hosts was also a concern for the Tok'Ra to consider, as a symbiote cannot survive without a host body.

| improve this answer | | | | |
  • ImmunoTech cloned a Goa'uld, and while we don't know if they would have survived for a long time there is no reason to suspect they wouldn't. The Asgard had a problem because of an explanation that doesn't really work, but more important their cloning only became a problem due to the number of times they did it, not doing it at all. If the Tok'Ra cloned their queen they wouldn't have that problem. As far as the getting hosts. While true to a certain extent, Jack and Daniel are bad example due to their experiences. A normal person today would be reticent but as time passed that would fade. – Durakken Jul 18 '16 at 9:26
  • Also, only the Wraith are shown to have a flawed cloning process. The others are presumed to be perfectly fine, but bad if used too much. Hypothetically, it wouldn't be hard to create a new Tok'Ra queen as all it would take is a little gene manipulation which many have shown to be able to do. – Durakken Jul 18 '16 at 9:32
  • The Asgard were victims of diminishing returns, with each clone being slightly more frail then the last. During their attempts to fix this defect, the Milky Way Asgard accidentally introduced a degenerative disease into their last batch of clone bodies that would ultimately kill the vast majority of them before they were able to put their consciousnesses back into clean bodies. Rather than prolong the suffering of their people, the Asgard high council decided it would be best to end their lives quickly and pass their legacy on to the most advanced race they could trust. Which was us. Yeah. – DisturbedNeo Jul 18 '16 at 10:00
  • I'm also not too sure about humans warming to the idea of symbiotes. We have enough discrimination and segregation amongst our own species based on petty beliefs, never mind having a literal alien species enter your head. You would literally be sharing your consciousness with another person. There are not a lot of people that would volunteer for that, less would successfully blend and even less than that would keep it up for a long time before getting fed up or going mad. – DisturbedNeo Jul 18 '16 at 10:05
  • I disagree. We have plenty of ailments that are the result of our immune system and not to mention post 60 cancer and other diseases start to overwhelm us and this is the case the older we get. Our population is huge, vast majority of our resources are going towards the elderly, and we have quite a lot of elderly that would like to live longer and with less ailments so I would bet that it would slowly become the norm for people over 60 or 80 to willingly become hosts, extending their life at leas another 100 or so years and everyone wins. – Durakken Jul 18 '16 at 10:28
0

Old question but you have missed the obvious: a clone does NOT contain the memories (other than the Asgards transfer tech).

As such cloning the human would just create a new child, and cloning the queen would be much much worst: it has the genetic knowledge of all before it (only the 1 queens personality was not evil). Essentially the new queen would have thousands of years of memories, all enjoying being powerful with only 1 being peaceful. This would heavily lead the clone into being evil. There is also no way of knowing the queens intentions: if she is evil she could get thousands of her offspring into host before anyone would ever knows.

The Asgard memory transfer is irrelevant here because its genetic memory with the queen. There's no reason to think the queen would be the same (the environment growing up leans towards more evil even with the best intentions, with the genetic memory). Nobody knows why the queen became nice in this ONE instance, so there would be no way to raise it with the same upbringing that lead to that, vs the 1000s years of happy feelings about ruling over other.

Another way to look at it is if a queen made 10 queens (why would only 1 be good), its the same as asking if its a good idea to clone Anubis and hope he will turn out good this time. As for cloning the symbiote its the same problem, the queen wouldn't be there to raise it right (in the water), so same result its probably going to be evil.

So in summary a better question is, why would you?

| improve this answer | | | | |
  • The question seems to be asking about cloning the Tok'Ra, not some random captured (Queen) Goa'uld. – Izkata Nov 4 '17 at 2:03

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.