bringing back extinct animals?

Post Reply New Topic

Can we bring back any extinct animals? Bringing back any of the dinosaurs seems unlikely, but what about the animals that became extinct more recently like the dodos, mammoths etc.?

Given enough expensive research I would think that approximations of some animals would be possible. Of course the ethics of bringing back animals whose habitat is long gone another matter. And bringing back solitary members of social species is pretty mean, I'd say. But still, some species intrigue me--the ones wiped out by man whose habitat is relatively intact. The thylacine is probably viable and there are several samples of its DNA available when the technology is ripe. You'd have to say I'm squarely in the "undecided" camp.

(I'd prefer that sabretooths not be introduced to the area where I run and hike. Sure love to see one, though...)

only if modified with the behaviors of dogs or cats and only if brought back as pets.

they died for a reason.

I say do it, but until we know its safe keep them in zoos.

I'd like to have a dodo .

they've already cloned a dog that found a survivor in 9/11

A lot of the problems centers around a host. If we can get artificial wombs going and find out the right nutrients they need...we're gold.

I wouldn't mind a Sabertooth assuming it had behavioural inhibitors to stop it...ya know...eating me.

There are actually a lot of animals that used to live in Australia that were probably wiped out by human activity. There's the thylacene, which was previously mentioned, but there were also a lot of species of emus, kangaroos, and wallabees. These are only extictions after 1788.
Some really cool species died out before 1788, however. Several diprodontids, a giant kangaroo (Procoptodon goliah), a huge monitor lizard (previously Megalania prisca, now Varanus priscus), and several giant birds related to ducks.
If all of those were to be brought back, Australia would be a very... interesting place.

Bring a creature back from the dead, for the sole purpose of keeping it in a cage? That scarcely seems ethical. Animals are sentient beings, they don't exist purely to be looked at.

A zoo isn't exactly the same thing as a cage.

Even if a now extinct organism can be re-created from DNA found in fossils, it is not clear that such organisms can survive in the world as it is now. Most of the species that went extinct, did so because of a catclysm or because the world changed (say, climate change) in such a way that the organism was no longer able to sustain itself. Most extinctions occur because of a mismatch between the organism and its environment.

ruveyn

Dinos are out of the question. The Mesozoic atmosphere here on planet Earth was quite different; they'd suffocate here in the Holocene.

The megafauna hunted to extinction in the past 10,000 years by humans could be brought back, though I'm not clear on the benefits of doing so. I'd rather see research that creates reliable replacement organs for humans or other animals that haven't gone extinct.

It'd be expensive. Also, they died out once. What says they won't just die out again and again and again? Aside from reviving extinct species for scientific research and exploitation of any interesting properties they may have I can't see any viable purpose to it.

Bring back ALF!!

Hunting was not the sole cause of the megafauna extinctions. There were plenty of other natural causes.

But back to the original question ... I think it ultimately depends, like most things, on whether or not a profit can be made from recreating the extinct animals. Another thing to consider is this ... in the history of science, how often have ethics determined whether or not research was allowed to continue, or discoveries allowed to be exploited? The answer is "not very often". Many things that are considered unethical by one generation are perfectly acceptable to the next.

To put it another way, history shows that if science can do something, and there's a profit to be made, it will do it.

I don't think there's any doubt whatsoever that extinct species will be recreated, as the technology becomes available. Eventually, this will include extinct human species, like Neanderthals. It won't be tomorrow or next week, but it's inevitable sooner or later.

Think of the ethical problems that will cause.

I agree that dinosaurs are out of the question when it comes to what animals could or could not be brought back. However, this would be due to the fact that it would probably be impossible to obtain the required genetic material. I do not think that if dinosaurs were introduced into the Holocene they would suffocate. Their physiology was virtually the same as that of any other tetrapod. They breathed oxygen, exhaled carbon dioxide, and drank water. What would the problem be?

Hmm, it's not necessary to have the genetic material of the extinct animal itself.
As long as the ancestors or the extinct animal are alive, and the evolutionary tree of the dead species is known, it could be brought back by artificially recombining the organisms that have produced the species in the past. However, that could take a long time. Also, as someone had mentioned before, there is no point in doing that as the extinct species had become extinct for a reason - it was unable to find a way to adapt to an unfavourable change in its environment. If the species is brought back, it would have to be kept in an artificially modified environment since there is no place on Earth for it anymore.