Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Should we bring back animals from the dead?

Mikeee
Posts: 234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2011 1:26:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I was recently watching Jurassic Park, and this occurred to me, If the technology to bring back species that have been extinct for thousands of years, or even went extinct recently, should we? Sure, bringing back animals that we know little about for study is one thing, but bringing back enough to re-establish their population is another thing. Some animal species went extinct because of natural selection and inability to adapt, while others became extinct/endangered because of the clumsiness of man and loss of habitat. I split between thinking it could be something really great or something devastating and terrible. What do you thing about this subject?
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2011 2:02:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/2/2011 1:26:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
I was recently watching Jurassic Park, and this occurred to me, If the technology to bring back species that have been extinct for thousands of years, or even went extinct recently, should we? Sure, bringing back animals that we know little about for study is one thing, but bringing back enough to re-establish their population is another thing. Some animal species went extinct because of natural selection and inability to adapt, while others became extinct/endangered because of the clumsiness of man and loss of habitat. I split between thinking it could be something really great or something devastating and terrible. What do you thing about this subject?

It depends on how long the species has been extinct. The Dodo bird would probably be able to be brough back and anything since, but the biosphere adapts to which species are present and once they are gone for long enough they would become essentially invasive and could cause damage.
Rob
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2011 2:57:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/2/2011 2:02:55 PM, Lasagna wrote:
At 9/2/2011 1:26:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
I was recently watching Jurassic Park, and this occurred to me, If the technology to bring back species that have been extinct for thousands of years, or even went extinct recently, should we? Sure, bringing back animals that we know little about for study is one thing, but bringing back enough to re-establish their population is another thing. Some animal species went extinct because of natural selection and inability to adapt, while others became extinct/endangered because of the clumsiness of man and loss of habitat. I split between thinking it could be something really great or something devastating and terrible. What do you thing about this subject?

It depends on how long the species has been extinct. The Dodo bird would probably be able to be brough back and anything since, but the biosphere adapts to which species are present and once they are gone for long enough they would become essentially invasive and could cause damage.

I think that certain species died as you noted, Mikee, due to lack of adaption to the environmental changes. Bringing them back from the dead would not suffice to support a reasonable large population of such species, since they might not be able to adapt to the current environment.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2011 3:21:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/2/2011 1:26:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
I was recently watching Jurassic Park, and this occurred to me, If the technology to bring back species that have been extinct for thousands of years, or even went extinct recently, should we? Sure, bringing back animals that we know little about for study is one thing, but bringing back enough to re-establish their population is another thing. Some animal species went extinct because of natural selection and inability to adapt, while others became extinct/endangered because of the clumsiness of man and loss of habitat. I split between thinking it could be something really great or something devastating and terrible. What do you thing about this subject?

Re-watching Jurassic Park, or first time?

If the capability exists to bring back extinct animals, I'd assume it'd be through some part of those animals still surviving, their DNA or whatever.

If so, what's stopping you from bringing back your dead great-grandparents? If this sounds like a really bad idea, I'd think bringing back anything from the dead would be equally bad.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2011 4:08:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/2/2011 1:26:34 PM, Mikeee wrote:
I was recently watching Jurassic Park, and this occurred to me, If the technology to bring back species that have been extinct for thousands of years, or even went extinct recently, should we? Sure, bringing back animals that we know little about for study is one thing, but bringing back enough to re-establish their population is another thing. Some animal species went extinct because of natural selection and inability to adapt, while others became extinct/endangered because of the clumsiness of man and loss of habitat. I split between thinking it could be something really great or something devastating and terrible. What do you thing about this subject?

It depends on how it went extinct. If humans drove it to extinction through overhunting or something, then it should be brought back. Plus, if the tech is based on the use of DNA, we could use the same technology to bolster populations of endangered and threatened species.
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
VainApocalypse
Posts: 74
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 1:48:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 1:40:30 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
We should insofar as it amuses us without being plainly detrimental to us, absolutely. Why wouldn't we?

We wouldn't want the north American prairie populated by anything that might run amok, damaging our cattle. However, if someone wants a pet velociraptor, or if a zoo sees profit in having a Megatherium exhibit, or if a research firm wants to attract some extra donors by putting out a mammoth, then by all means, clone away.
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2011 1:02:08 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 1:48:28 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:40:30 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
We should insofar as it amuses us without being plainly detrimental to us, absolutely. Why wouldn't we?

We wouldn't want the north American prairie populated by anything that might run amok, damaging our cattle. However, if someone wants a pet velociraptor, or if a zoo sees profit in having a Megatherium exhibit, or if a research firm wants to attract some extra donors by putting out a mammoth, then by all means, clone away.

I like the way you think.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
devinni01841
Posts: 1,405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2011 8:23:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Insert zombie apocalypse joke here.
There is nothing more bad-@ss than being yourself.

I solemnly swear I am up to no good.

Member of the Texas Army National Guard since 20111212

An Armed society is a polite society.
el-badgero
Posts: 1,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2011 8:49:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 1:48:28 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:40:30 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
We should insofar as it amuses us without being plainly detrimental to us, absolutely. Why wouldn't we?

We wouldn't want the north American prairie populated by anything that might run amok, damaging our cattle. However, if someone wants a pet velociraptor, or if a zoo sees profit in having a Megatherium exhibit, or if a research firm wants to attract some extra donors by putting out a mammoth, then by all means, clone away.

can I fly pterodactyls and hunt t-rexes with a bazooka?
DATCMOTO's moustache makes him look like an eejit...

edit: nah, i'm jealous... God's an eejit definitely though!
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2011 3:16:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The topic should read...

"Should we bring back certain animal species from extinction?"
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2011 9:59:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Currently, in the US endangered species have absolute rights to preservation. Rerouting a dangerous highway was forbidden by court order because it might have threatened the habitat of certain moth. At least 20 people have died in traffic accidents as a result. So we kill people to save other species.

So the question is whether extinct species should be restored? The answer is "sometimes." That implies that sometimes species should be allowed to go extinct.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2011 10:15:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/15/2011 9:59:47 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
Currently, in the US endangered species have absolute rights to preservation. Rerouting a dangerous highway was forbidden by court order because it might have threatened the habitat of certain moth. At least 20 people have died in traffic accidents as a result. So we kill people to save other species.

So the question is whether extinct species should be restored? The answer is "sometimes." That implies that sometimes species should be allowed to go extinct.

That, I feel, is a dangerous road to take. So, we brush aside life just because it's inconvenient? It's not like that highway is a matter of life and death to humans now, is it?

I'm all for utilizing all resources to the utmost, but attempts should be made to first try and find better alternatives.

Can that highway not be rerouted anywhere else? If the original highway is dangerous, why is it still operating? Do the people driving over the highway know it's dangerous? If yes, then who's to blame if people choose danger over inconvenience?

I also find it ironical that they are worried about saving the moths when driving kills innumerable insects by itself. The number of times I had to wipe my windshield of dead bugs driving down the I-5.....
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2011 12:41:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 1:48:28 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:40:30 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
We should insofar as it amuses us without being plainly detrimental to us, absolutely. Why wouldn't we?

We wouldn't want the north American prairie populated by anything that might run amok, damaging our cattle. However, if someone wants a pet velociraptor, or if a zoo sees profit in having a Megatherium exhibit, or if a research firm wants to attract some extra donors by putting out a mammoth, then by all means, clone away.

Cool animals such as wolves, bears and wild boar used to roam the British Isles in large numbers, but they were driven into extinction by landowners concerned by the damage they did to crops and livestock.

Many attempts have been made to reintroduce them from mainland Europe but every time the farmers and country landowners have used their massive wealth and political influence to block the plans.

Shame.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2011 12:50:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/15/2011 12:41:17 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:48:28 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:40:30 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
We should insofar as it amuses us without being plainly detrimental to us, absolutely. Why wouldn't we?

We wouldn't want the north American prairie populated by anything that might run amok, damaging our cattle. However, if someone wants a pet velociraptor, or if a zoo sees profit in having a Megatherium exhibit, or if a research firm wants to attract some extra donors by putting out a mammoth, then by all means, clone away.

Cool animals such as wolves, bears and wild boar used to roam the British Isles in large numbers, but they were driven into extinction by landowners concerned by the damage they did to crops and livestock.

Many attempts have been made to reintroduce them from mainland Europe but every time the farmers and country landowners have used their massive wealth and political influence to block the plans.

Shame.

That's not fair Brian. Would you be willing to let animals that affect the travel industry (I don't know which those could be) be reintroduced?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2011 1:21:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/15/2011 12:50:11 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 9/15/2011 12:41:17 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:48:28 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:40:30 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
We should insofar as it amuses us without being plainly detrimental to us, absolutely. Why wouldn't we?

We wouldn't want the north American prairie populated by anything that might run amok, damaging our cattle. However, if someone wants a pet velociraptor, or if a zoo sees profit in having a Megatherium exhibit, or if a research firm wants to attract some extra donors by putting out a mammoth, then by all means, clone away.

Cool animals such as wolves, bears and wild boar used to roam the British Isles in large numbers, but they were driven into extinction by landowners concerned by the damage they did to crops and livestock.

Many attempts have been made to reintroduce them from mainland Europe but every time the farmers and country landowners have used their massive wealth and political influence to block the plans.

Shame.

That's not fair Brian. Would you be willing to let animals that affect the travel industry (I don't know which those could be) be reintroduced?

The only animals that have affected the travel industry over recent years are cows which contracted BSE and chickens which contracted Avian Flu due to the farmers' wilful negligence of animal welfare and hygiene regulations, and drove away all the tourists, costing the British incoming tour operators hundreds of millions of pounds.

The farmers and landowners get massive subsidies and they are also fully compensated by the taxpayer for any loss of livestock resulting from the outbreak of diseases but there are no subsidies and no compensation for the travel industry.

So, no, I'm sorry, but I don't have much sympathy for farmers and country landowners who grow fat courtesy of the public purse.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/16/2011 10:16:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/15/2011 1:21:53 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 9/15/2011 12:50:11 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 9/15/2011 12:41:17 PM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:48:28 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 9/4/2011 1:40:30 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
We should insofar as it amuses us without being plainly detrimental to us, absolutely. Why wouldn't we?

We wouldn't want the north American prairie populated by anything that might run amok, damaging our cattle. However, if someone wants a pet velociraptor, or if a zoo sees profit in having a Megatherium exhibit, or if a research firm wants to attract some extra donors by putting out a mammoth, then by all means, clone away.

Cool animals such as wolves, bears and wild boar used to roam the British Isles in large numbers, but they were driven into extinction by landowners concerned by the damage they did to crops and livestock.

Many attempts have been made to reintroduce them from mainland Europe but every time the farmers and country landowners have used their massive wealth and political influence to block the plans.

Shame.

That's not fair Brian. Would you be willing to let animals that affect the travel industry (I don't know which those could be) be reintroduced?

The only animals that have affected the travel industry over recent years are cows which contracted BSE and chickens which contracted Avian Flu due to the farmers' wilful negligence of animal welfare and hygiene regulations, and drove away all the tourists, costing the British incoming tour operators hundreds of millions of pounds.

The farmers and landowners get massive subsidies and they are also fully compensated by the taxpayer for any loss of livestock resulting from the outbreak of diseases but there are no subsidies and no compensation for the travel industry.

So, no, I'm sorry, but I don't have much sympathy for farmers and country landowners who grow fat courtesy of the public purse.

You really have it in for the farmers, don't you?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.