Cloning extinct species.

[kaotic]

Today on techtv there is going to be a show called "Secret, Strange & True", and this episode is going to be about cloning extinct animals like the woolly mammoth or saber-toothed tiger and others.

Recent successes in the field of interspecies embryo transfer have provided hope that, if viable cells were to be recovered from these bacteria-proof environments, a surrogate mother could help bring an animal back from the dead. That's a big "if," but scientists may be closer than you think. Catch "Planet of the Clones" to see just how close they really are.

http://www.techtv.com/secretstrangeandtrue/story/0,24330,3403522,00.html

I hope that this really happens I would love to see a saber-toothed tiger in real life. I don't know about the rest of you but the future of cloning looks good and I hope that it happens.

David.

 

[Kookaburra]

Oh yes, I would say that cloning extinct species would be great. I would love to see the pleasant putty tats with ginormous teeth (lol) romping around in a steel-enclosed play-pen.

I love animals. I think it would be wonderful fun to see lots of these long-gone animals brought 'back' to life. Especially the Tasmanian Tiger, saber-tooth kitty, the extinct animals of the cat and Equuis (is that how you spell it?) families a lot. I just love animals.

But there would be some difficulties. You have to take it one step at a time, and clone masses of the one animal at once or they'd inbreed and get genetic defects. And the samples themselves would have to come from a wide range of that animal, or the same problem would arise, and you'd have one stupid species emerge, with altered DNA or whatever.

Then'd you'd have the problem of where to put them. I mean, there's just not the room to store a great cotten mammoth without damage to our growing society. You'll always have these problems, and you've got to think of the environmental impact.

It would be interesting, though. I certainly agree. Although, when it gets to the human part of the 'animal' spectrum, I tend to shy from the subject. It just confuses me and raises more questions than it answers.

 

[kaotic]

Yeah it would be great. And I do believe Human Cloning is bad, but cloning extinct animals would be really great.

 

[Dawn Marie]

Yeah, I think that would be awesome if they brought back some extinct species. I mean, it's amazing to think about... that it might be possible. I'd love to see what a saber-tooth looks like... living and breathing and all.

Wow.

 

[Dewjunkie]

As a Christian and a creationist, I would be against it because I believe those animals are extinct for a reason, and to bring them back would be against God's will.

I'm not sure how an evolutionist could support the idea, as it would completely negate Darwin's own "Survival of the Fittest" ideal. Those animals weren't the fittest, they died off. Bringing them back would throw the chain of evolution out of whack (for lack of a better term).

Animal rights activists should surely be opposed, because the only point in bringing them back would be for human enjoyment and scientific testing. Would it be fair to bring back a Saber-Toothed Tiger and then slap him into an encampment at the San Diego Zoo to be poked and prodded and studied non-stop? I think not.

Any scientific data gathered from their return would be subject to critism, as there would be questions of the purity of the DNA sample, the mixture of the sample with the host, and then the purpose of the data in general. Other than curiosity and the desire to promote cloning, what benefit would science or mankind get from resurrecting a Wooly Mammoth?

 

[kaotic]

Originally posted by Dewjunkie
As a Christian and a creationist, I would be against it because I believe those animals are extinct for a reason, and to bring them back would be against God's will.

I'm not sure how an evolutionist could support the idea, as it would completely negate Darwin's own "Survival of the Fittest" ideal. Those animals weren't the fittest, they died off. Bringing them back would throw the chain of evolution out of whack (for lack of a better term).

Animal rights activists should surely be opposed, because the only point in bringing them back would be for human enjoyment and scientific testing. Would it be fair to bring back a Saber-Toothed Tiger and then slap him into an encampment at the San Diego Zoo to be poked and prodded and studied non-stop? I think not.

Any scientific data gathered from their return would be subject to critism, as there would be questions of the purity of the DNA sample, the mixture of the sample with the host, and then the purpose of the data in general. Other than curiosity and the desire to promote cloning, what benefit would science or mankind get from resurrecting a Wooly Mammoth?

Well as someone that loves science I have been reading up on this for a while and it seems that some scientists are already tring to clone the Wooly Mammoth. But I have to disagree with you to bring back animals that have been extinct by humans should be brought back. The Wooly Mammoth could tell us how close Wooly Mammoths and elephant's are to each other. And the same for the saber-toothed tiger, and others.

Animals that have been killed off by man kind should be brought back, there deadth had nothing to do with god.

 

[Tinman]

Well I have to say I'm in favour. In Australia we have many introduced species that are pests but survive very well because there are no natural preditors. If for instance the Thylacine (Tassie Tiger) could be brought back from extinction, it could prove to be a solution to the control of pests like the rabbit.

 

 

[sulphur]

There is debate going on at the moment in tasmania of the cloning of a thylacine from preserved genetic material.But if it did succeed how many clones would be needed to make a viable population?

 

[ocean]

There's one thing I don't get. If all the clones share the same genetic material, what would be the point of coning more than one? There would still be the problem of inbreeding.

 

[Mid]

as much as I would be absolutely THRILLED to see one of the extincj animals,

You have to remember, you can't put them back in nature. They are gone for a reason, and they would wipe out a number of things. THe've already been replaced by nature by something else.
DO you really want to see some Poor prehistoric animal being gawked at, and it/them havingt to stay caged for the rest of their life with no privacy?

 

[Mid]

i am speaking prehistoric now.
If they descid to bring back the passenger pigeon or dodo, something recent
I am all for it.

 

[kaotic]

Originally posted by Mid
as much as I would be absolutely THRILLED to see one of the extincj animals,

You have to remember, you can't put them back in nature. They are gone for a reason, and they would wipe out a number of things. THe've already been replaced by nature by something else.
DO you really want to see some Poor prehistoric animal being gawked at, and it/them havingt to stay caged for the rest of their life with no privacy?

That isn't completely true, there has been almost exist animals and put them in places where they have died out and everything worked alright.

 

[kaotic]

Originally posted by ocean
There's one thing I don't get. If all the clones share the same genetic material, what would be the point of coning more than one? There would still be the problem of inbreeding.

I don't think it would be a problem after all humans came from one cell. But but i am not geneticist.

 

[Mid]

but what about taking an animal and ADDING IT?

Look at the fox in australia, also, rabbits

 

[Mid]

and that is not always the case where you take away animals and nothing happens.

 

[kaotic]

Thats what I was talking about alot of animals have been extinct in some areas and when they are put bad in those areas everything goes ok.

 

[wb3]

I wouldn't want them to clone anything. First I agree they are gone for a reason whatever it maybe. Second if a saber tooth tiger got loose there is no telling how many people he/she may kill before it is killed in an absurd waste of money. As cool as it would be to all of us myself included they are gone for a reason.

 

[kaotic]

It would take a while before a saber tooth tiger got big enough to kill anyone. It would be just like a lion or tiger cub. And they wouldn't the meat eating animals in public.

 

[Tinman]

In the case of the Thylacine, they're gone because humans kept shooting them, bullets are not natural selection. So to bring them back using genetic engineering would be setting the record straight IMO.

There would probably be a problem with them attacking sheep which the farmers won't like, but the introduction of the Elmer Fudd gene should ensure they only go after those wascley wabbits.

 

[kaotic]

In the case of the Thylacine, they're gone because humans kept shooting them, bullets are not natural selection. So to bring them back using genetic engineering would be setting the record straight IMO.

HEH, I wouldn't say shooting them more like stabbing and spearing them since I don't think humans had guns back then, well maybe bow and arrows.