Quantcast

What works and what is paused · Email is limited to account activation and password resets.

Jump to content


Photo

Playing "God"


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#1 Dichromate

Dichromate
  • 277 posts

Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:43 PM

Well, it's certainly very interesting, being able to bring back long extinct animals. The last I saw on NatGeo, there was something about putting extinct ox/buffalo genes onto a still-existing kind and watch them slowly turn back into a genetic copy of their predecessor or something like that. From a few months ago, I think.

At the very least this'll make a nice new addition to the zoos. ;p

Advertisement

    #2 ToxicS

    ToxicS
    • 2580 posts

    Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:44 PM

    I heard something about this a while ago, guess it seems like it is finally turning into reality.

    Pretty cool.

    #3 Narna

    Narna
    • 361 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:46 PM

    Indeed it does seem interesting, and yes, Jurassic Park, though, would reviving/cloning/"creating" an animal from so long ago be practical?

    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 :p

    #4 Ziz

    Ziz
    • 936 posts

    Posted 14 January 2011 - 11:47 PM

    I doubt that it will be that easy.
    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 Dichromate

    Dichromate
    • 277 posts

    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 Noitidart

    Noitidart
    • Neocodex Co-Founder

    • 23214 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 12:42 AM

    What would be the mother for that beast would be my question and according to the article an African elephant can handle it no problem. That is too cool I would soooo love to see a real live wooly mammoth!!

    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 Lychee

    Lychee
    • 633 posts

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 03:41 AM

    This would be awesome in the literal sense of the word. I hope Professor Iritani can find the tissue he needs in Sibera.

    #8 Sweeney

    Sweeney
    • 1230 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:11 AM

    The problem of genetic stagnation is really the only ethical issue that occurs to me.

    Is it right to revive a species that will not be able to survive without continued, serious medical intervention?

    I would say not.

    #9 Waser Lave

    Waser Lave
    • 25516 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:24 AM

    In an era of supposed global warming it's probably not the best idea to choose to bring back a species which thrived in very cold climates. :/

    #10 Reality

    Reality
    • 106 posts

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 04:38 AM

    Animals have already been brought back from extinction by cloning. The pyranean ibex was briefly brought back from extinction but the clone died from lung failure or something.

    Of course it's a completely different story though because the tissue samples were only a few years old in that case.

    #11 Nunc

    Nunc
    • 443 posts

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 07:59 AM

    I like Mammoths, and support their reintroduction, but you must admit that if they were to be brought back, they'd be brought to Russia, their last native habitat. And if that's the case, the US will likely throw a hissy fit and block the project's completion.

    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 Random

    Random
    • 8199 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 08:47 AM

    inb4dinosaurtakeover

    #13 equitatus

    equitatus
    • 269 posts

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 09:42 AM

    Why does anyone care if anyone is playing god.........will that incite gods wrath?

    #14 Wil

    Wil
    • 200 posts

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 09:47 AM

    5 bucks says PETA gets involved.

    #15 Shadowfool

    Shadowfool
    • 419 posts

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 10:02 AM

    I'm going to buy me a wooly mammoth and kill it, for ironies sake.

    #16 Ziz

    Ziz
    • 936 posts

    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 Waser Lave

    Waser Lave
    • 25516 posts


    Users Awards

    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 Ziz

    Ziz
    • 936 posts

    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 Waser Lave

    Waser Lave
    • 25516 posts


    Users Awards

    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 luvsmyncis

    luvsmyncis
    • I have no friends.

    • 6724 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 15 January 2011 - 11:42 AM

    Do you regard it as being any different to conservation efforts to save, for example, the giant panda from extinction?

    By golly.
    Posted Image
    Pandas are WAY cuter. Therefore they are more important than mammoths.

    #21 Ziz

    Ziz
    • 936 posts

    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 Random

    Random
    • 8199 posts


    Users Awards

    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 Ziz

    Ziz
    • 936 posts

    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 Random

    Random
    • 8199 posts


    Users Awards

    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 Ziz

    Ziz
    • 936 posts

    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