Playing "God"
#1
Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:43 PM
At the very least this'll make a nice new addition to the zoos. ;p
#2
Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:44 PM
Pretty cool.
#3
Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:46 PM
With global warming going crazy, and the Woolly Mammoth living in such cold conditions, would we need to fly to the coldest place to see it? I don't see it being in a cage at the zoo...
And isn't it like really huge? Wouldn't wanna piss it off or anything
#4
Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:47 PM
Iit's really hard that the African Elephant egg cells are compatible with the mammoths nuclei, and it would be even harder to find an compatible "mother" that could host the bryo.
Hopefully after modifying some generations of elephants it could be possible.
I think that this could be applied to bring back some of the species the humanity has brought to extintion (but I they always use science for militar purposes first, so we have reasons to be afraid).
#5
Posted 15 January 2011 - 12:28 AM
With global warming going crazy, and the Woolly Mammoth living in such cold conditions, would we need to fly to the coldest place to see it? I don't see it being in a cage at the zoo...
I live in a tropical country, and there are polar bears in our zoos. They solve the problem by digging a pit-cage (colder the deeper you go) for it, and putting air-conditionals in it. Of course, the mammoth should be a lot bigger and thicker than a meager polar bear though.
#6
Posted 15 January 2011 - 12:42 AM
How will it reproduce though? They will have to clone more. Then clones will have to reproduce amongst themselves??? Not possible cuz a clone is a clone so all either male or female. I hope they have some samples of different unrelated mammoths. That would be awesome.
I want to see a sabertooth tiger man. Do they have tissue of that?
Anyone know why 4 years? How long is a typical elephant pregnancy?
#7
Posted 15 January 2011 - 03:41 AM
#8
Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:11 AM
Is it right to revive a species that will not be able to survive without continued, serious medical intervention?
I would say not.
#9
Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:24 AM
#10
Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:38 AM
Of course it's a completely different story though because the tissue samples were only a few years old in that case.
#11
Posted 15 January 2011 - 07:59 AM
That said, I'd love to see mammoths roaming their ancestral lands near Norilsk or Vorkuta
Edited by Nunc, 15 January 2011 - 07:59 AM.
#12
Posted 15 January 2011 - 08:47 AM
#13
Posted 15 January 2011 - 09:42 AM
#14
Posted 15 January 2011 - 09:47 AM
#15
Posted 15 January 2011 - 10:02 AM
#16
Posted 15 January 2011 - 10:28 AM
Why does anyone care if anyone is playing god.........will that incite gods wrath?
Because trying to bring back extint species from long ago is just wrong.
Something can get wrong (like a lot of times before).
#17
Posted 15 January 2011 - 10:31 AM
Because trying to bring back extint species from long ago is just wrong.
Something can get wrong (like a lot of times before).
What makes it wrong?
#18
Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:05 AM
What makes it wrong?
They were extinct for a reason, and bringing them back to the ecosystem is just wrong.
It's true that human pushed their extinction, and that the tundra is not very different from what it used to be.
But that ecosystem has adapted to what it is now. The mammoths can break the current balance. The nature would adapt, but that impact can accelerate another species extintion.
IMO this can be helpful for bringing back recent extinted animals and trying to re-introduce them, but if they are bringing back mammoths, then they would have to do it very carefully (and I keep thinking it's wrong because of those risks).
#19
Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:37 AM
They were extinct for a reason, and bringing them back to the ecosystem is just wrong.
Do you regard it as being any different to conservation efforts to save, for example, the giant panda from extinction?
#20
Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:42 AM
By golly.Do you regard it as being any different to conservation efforts to save, for example, the giant panda from extinction?

Pandas are WAY cuter. Therefore they are more important than mammoths.
#21
Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:55 AM
Do you regard it as being any different to conservation efforts to save, for example, the giant panda from extinction?
The human is having an great influence driving the Giant Panda to extintion (deforestation and hunting).
Also the Giant Panda have an role in it's ecosystem spreading the bamboo seeds.
The mamoth has no longer a role in it's ecosystem, it would have no natural predators and noone can easily predict their role on the ecosystem.
#22
Posted 15 January 2011 - 12:14 PM
The human is having an great influence driving the Giant Panda to extintion (deforestation and hunting).
Also the Giant Panda have an role in it's ecosystem spreading the bamboo seeds.
The mamoth has no longer a role in it's ecosystem, it would have no natural predators and noone can easily predict their role on the ecosystem.
I'm sure that the scientists are going to let expensive cloning experiments free into the wild.
#23
Posted 15 January 2011 - 12:38 PM
I'm sure that the scientists are going to let expensive cloning experiments free into the wild.
I was talking about using this technology for something more useful.
IMHO helping endangered or recent extinct species can be more helpful than cloning mamoths.
#24
Posted 15 January 2011 - 01:15 PM
I was talking about using this technology for something more useful.
IMHO helping endangered or recent extinct species can be more helpful than cloning mamoths.
What are the recently extinct species useful for?
#25
Posted 15 January 2011 - 01:50 PM
What are the recently extinct species useful for?
The biodiversity helps keeping an ecosystem balance.
The greater the biodiversity, the stronger/more adaptable it is.
(Mammoths don't count as their enviroment has changed more significatively).
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


