Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes, they should.

    We do not know enough about how it would impact the world to blindly revive extinct species just because we find them cute.
    I will assume most of us are thinking about dinosaurs. Do you really want them back?
    Some of the herbivores could go extinct again because of lack of food. Maybe modern plants are poisonous to them or just not nutritive enough.
    The carnivores are a separate topic. They could, again, die of lack of food. But they could also start eating modern animals and take some modern species to extinction. They could even take us as they favorite prey. Do you want that?

    There are a lot of bad things that could happen when we play with what we do not understand.

    Posted by: Rafe
  • They Could Extinct Humans

    They should not be brought back because they could kill or extinct a lot or all humans. We could lose our habitats for animals that aren't extinct trying to make homes for the brought back animals. If this helped you please like! These are facts that have been stated from different texts.

  • Rate if you like :)

    Scientists inspired by the movie Jurassic Park believe they can bring extinct species back to life by using science this is called de-extinction. However Jurassic park is pure fantasy. Extinct species shouldn’t be brought back to existence, because of the economic downfall that will happen if we revive the dinosaur or any extinct species.
    If we bring back extinct species it cause economic downfall throughout the world. For example “ To sustain even a single dinosaur, one would need thousands of trees “ ( Pimm) This means that even if we can bring a dinosaur back to life, we don’t have the food to sustain it even for a year. All bring a dinosaur back to life would be misery and cause deadly environmental problems. Trees help our world whether it’s for paper or food, letting the dinosaurs eat them all is going to kill the world we live in today. Also “Cutting edge biotechnology can be expensive when it’s first developed.” ( Zimmer ) This shows me that it will take millions of dollars to de extinct species. Would that be worth it? We can try wasting fortune on dinosaurs, which can hurt us more than help us, or we can waste it on the environment today. The environment today is hurting too. Bringing back extinct species can also be unpredictable. For example “ Previously benign organisms could become pests in new environments.” ( Ehrlich ) These animals have been extinct for years, who knows how they will react to their new environment. These are wild creatures, unlike a dog we can’t just put a leash on the thing. Furthermore another reason bring back extinct species can be unpredictable is “ Might prove ideals reservoirs or vectors of nasty plagues.” (Ehrlich ) These revived organisms may have diseases from the world they used to live in; diseases that we haven’t experienced yet. Then we have to find cures to the new diseases, which will lessen our population and lose more money.
    Although Angela Herring would argue how bringing back animals “particularly charismatic or culturally valued ones” would be good and that. “ Bringing back species that were caused to go extinct by human practices would, to some extent, help make up for the wrong extinction.” However de-extincting only adding up to the wrong of extinction. Scientists and people are too focused on the past to look at the present. They talk about bringing back dead animals while, their are animals out there are dieing because of us, because we can’t open our eyes to the world that’s already there. This is not redemption to all the animals that died because us it’s a waste. The thought of de-extinction is not helping us, rather it’s just blinding us. If we want to redemption to all those dead animals, rather than looking at the past we should be looking at the future and helping animals today and helping the environment today live on.

  • Why would you even want to bring them back to life?

    So you can state how cool it is... No! We shall not bring them back. We need to focus on animals that could go extinct today, tomorrow, or even years from today. We need to be putting money into keeping them alive rather than having a chance of bringing back ,1-3% of them.

  • Yes, it might slow down other research.

    If we bring back extinct animals (witch we had for a few minutes) it might slow down more important causes like cancer. And, if we waste our time on this and they dont survive, what good is it? This is coming from a child though. Cancer is more important than extinct animals

  • Yes they can't live on this planet earth.

    The wooly mammoth, for example, lived in grassy planes long, long ago. Today, that has been replaced by tundra that is not suitable for them. Will they be forced to just be zoo animals, for our entertainment that live their lives in cages?
    We shouldn't waste our time and money on this obvious debate, it is easy to see which side is right

  • Yes, life on earth has changed

    If an animal that was extinct, like a kind of ancient turtle or shark or any other animal were to be revived, scientists may not know much about the animal. It could starve before they even figure out its diet and what it eats may not even be around anymore. There are just so many things that can go wrong. It could end up as Jurassic Park all over again.

  • Yes, because life has evolved.

    If an animal has become extinct, there was some natural or man made phenomenon that caused it. Since then, the world has evolved to take in its loss. It would be dangerous to try to bring back a species that has not been around for many years, centuries, or more than that.

  • Tt t tthey would kill us

    F f f f f fg fgdgdfgr g g g g g g gnjfnrf f t t tt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t

  • Tt t tthey would kill us

    F f f f f fg fgdgdfgr g g g g g g gnjfnrf f t t tt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t

  • Not all of them

    We should be selective. We can analyze the way animals interact in their ecology and see if these new animals will fit in. When we terraform Mars we should make it interesting and not just a repeat of Earth. We should construct an ecology of mostly animals that are extinct on Earth.

  • Yes we should

    Scientists and other people would love to discover and learn more about these animals. They will make us understand the past and future of our society. I would really love to see these animals come to life and I would like to ride on a dinosaur or a mammoth someday.

  • Extinct animals - let's bring them back!

    If future scientific progress means that it is possible to bring back previously extinct animals, why not? I don't mean that we should bring back all of the dinosaurs in a Jurassic Park type scenario, but learning more about extinct animals by actually witnessing their existence couldn't hurt anyone. Think about seeing a dodo bird living and breathing - think about all we could learn! I don't condone releasing them into the wild, into a completely changed environment to what they were used to. However, if they animals were properly treated in a simulated, comfortable environment, what harm could be done?

  • Yes and no, because of politics using cloning as an excuse for deforestation, but we could use a certain species for research.

    For example, some politicians are convinced that we can cut down the entire northwest forest and just keep a few spotted owls in captivity as insurance. On the contrary, the gastric brooding frog, could be used in medical research. All in all, cloning would turn our attention away from conservation.

  • No, they wouldn't adapt to our environment

    It would cost way too much, how would they adapt to the type of environment we now have. How would we take care of them when humans can hardly take care of themselves? Would we ever allow them to live freely in the wild? If we cloned them they could be deformed, or even sick, then suffer and die

  • Yes they can't live on this planet earth.

    The wooly mammoth, for example, lived in grassy planes long, long ago. Today, that has been replaced by tundra that is not suitable for them. Will they be forced to just be zoo animals, for our entertainment that live their lives in cages?
    We shouldn't waste our time and money on this obvious debate, it is easy to see which side is right

  • Tt t tthey would kill us

    F f f f f fg fgdgdfgr g g g g g g gnjfnrf f t t tt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t

  • Tt t tthey would kill us

    F f f f f fg fgdgdfgr g g g g g g gnjfnrf f t t tt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t t t tt t

  • We must fix what we destroyed.

    I'm not saying bring back dinosaurs or the Ice Age. They're extinction was beyond our power. But think about what humans have done! We killed dodo birds, passenger pigeons, gastric brooding frogs, rhinos, elephants, owls, and hundreds more. We must bring them back. But to do that, we need to also stop poaching. Once we bring them back, we need to make sure they stay.

  • That is just cruel!!!

    Humans killed most of them!! So we should try to bring them back!! I can not believe that some people want these animals to stay dead!! I think that Wooly mammoths and passenger pigeons should be cloned back!!! I can't believe that there are some jerks who wouldn't want to bring them back!!!


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.