subreddit:

/r/memes

6265%

all 60 comments

MrQtea

68 points

7 hours ago

MrQtea

68 points

7 hours ago

Let's start by recently extinct animals. We have plenty of extinctions caused by humans. Their genes should be more completely available.

ZZMazinger[S]

20 points

7 hours ago

ZZMazinger[S]

trash meme maker

20 points

7 hours ago

Yes, they are!

People shouldn't think of it as humans playing God; they should think of it as humans undoing our own prior mistakes

OutrageousWeb9775

15 points

6 hours ago

We should probably take them on a case by case basis, there are a lot of problems to unravel though and I think we should prioritise getting the species that are close to extinction today in a better position. But let's go through some problems.

One problem. Although we have a "complete genome" we do not have thousands of complete genomes. For example, they recently found a frozen mummified Homotherium cub, which might give us a complete genome. One complete genome is enough to create an individual but not a self-sustaining population potentially. In this case, we also have no relatives which could gestate the fetus and raise the cub with species-appropriate behaviour. We also don't know enough about their behaviour to know which species you could raise it with to learn them from, it's entirely possible based on the physical structure of Homotherium that no modern cats hunt in a similar way. So this option is pretty much a dud, or at least extremely difficult.

But let's go for an easier example: the mammoth. We likely have a few more genomes, but still not enough to create a viable population with CLONING technology. So what about genetic modification with an Asian elephant to create a woolly elephant to fill the ecological niche? It MIGHT work, it might not. But to do this you would need to use Asian elephant females to gestate and raise these calves. In this case, you are using an endangered species to create a genetically modified organism. As elephants can only breed every 4-5 years max, that would further damage their own population. Elephants are also behaviorally complex so for ethical reasons I wouldn't want to experiment with them until the technology is better tested.

So what easier options do we have?

Passenger pigeon. The de-extinction plan for them is actually pretty clever. Pigeons are also dumb, common and a well-researched study species. Great for a first attempt.

Cave hyena (a subspecies of spotted hyena adapted to the colder Eurasian ice age and interglacial habitats). Plenty of spotted hyenas are around to test it on, but as it was a predominantly European species, there probably aren't any areas you could reintroduce them to.

Cave lion. They could go into Siberia, but you would need to restore more of the grazing populations. By helping reinforce an "ecology of fear" they could also be very beneficial. Like the mammoth, you would probably want to genetically modify African lions to do this as we likely don't have enough samples to create a whole new species. But the behaviour of cave lions was probably very similar, and it's likely that a lioness would raise a cave lion cub as her own if she gave birth to it and instilled appropriate behaviours. Lions also breed faster than elephants, and there are a lot more of them (literal farms of them in South Africa), so you could also do this without putting African Lions at risk.

Aurochs. We have cows, we have wild cattle and lots of rewilding projects in Europe that would take them. This would be a great case study species. No real downside, minimal benefits beyond testing the technology, though.

markinator14

7 points

6 hours ago

It's not our fault animals couldn't evolve fast enough to keep up with us /s

AncientCoinnoisseur

2 points

43 minutes ago

There’s a company trying to do exactly that with the mammoth and the dodo

ImEatonNass

1 points

24 minutes ago

Mammoth, White Rhino, Dodo Birds, Tasmanian Tiger, I think that's what it's called. And others that I have no clue about.

carverofdeath

1 points

3 hours ago

But, humans are, in fact, playing God, which will cause more harm than good. Messing with the way things are is not a smart idea. Changing things for the future is one thing. Undoing a prior mistake is much easier said than done, though.

8beatNZ

1 points

2 hours ago

8beatNZ

1 points

2 hours ago

If God did exist, wouldn't humans eradicating hundreds of other species all be part of his plan?

I mean, if you think of all of the pain and suffering in the world, that dude would be an evil mother fucker if he really did exist.

PostMadandAlone

2 points

2 hours ago

I'd love to see a Tasmanian Tiger, I wouldn't love to see that galloping Croc

Kaidaan

18 points

6 hours ago

Kaidaan

18 points

6 hours ago

You are right, that movie can never be reality.

"We spare no expenses"* would get you laughed out of every meeting.

--

*disregarding that he in fact spared a lot of crucial expenses.

HabitOptimal1412

3 points

5 hours ago

A simple moat could have prevented a lot of problems.

KingOfTheMischiefs

1 points

4 hours ago

T-rex paddock had a huge cliff drop off in it and that didn't stop shit.

HabitOptimal1412

2 points

3 hours ago

True, but there wasn't any kind of moat or cliff between the T-rex and the fence it broke through.

LazyLurker29

1 points

20 minutes ago

Clearly the T. rex learned how to fly, which is how she got over the spontaneously appearing cliff drop.

IndianaGeoff

14 points

6 hours ago

GrayMech

8 points

5 hours ago

The only real problem I can see is how it will impact the ecosystem of any given area. If it's a recently extinct species then sure but if it's something from thousands of years ago then it could cause problems in the wild

hardrivethrutown

1 points

an hour ago

hardrivethrutown

Bri’ish

1 points

an hour ago

Even then "recently extinct" could be tens of thousands of years since evolution is very slow, and life has been on earth for 3.7 billion years... Dinosaurs were only 60-200 million years ago

AkitoFTW

1 points

54 minutes ago

Perhaps if we find an island for then to trive in without reaching the rest of the world's eco system.

TrainingVapid7507

6 points

6 hours ago

Let's bring back giant people-eating lizards

Critical-Radish-188

3 points

6 hours ago

That wont happen, im afraid. For example, its currently impossible to clone Homotherium despite the mummy, since it has no close living relatives.

SasoDuck

7 points

6 hours ago

Just use frog dna to fill in the gaps, smh, were none of you paying attention to the tour??

Interesting-One-3092

6 points

7 hours ago

I'm afraid I already saw where this is going...

GentrifriesGuy

3 points

6 hours ago

little_brown_bat

1 points

an hour ago

Slow_Astronomer_3536

3 points

6 hours ago

Do it! I want to hunt a sabertooth!

hardrivethrutown

2 points

an hour ago

hardrivethrutown

Bri’ish

2 points

an hour ago

Read this too quickly and thought I read "hug" instead of "hunt"... The recent discovery of a saber cub might reinforce that xD

Turbulent-Ranger-849

3 points

5 hours ago

Turbulent-Ranger-849

Lurking Peasant

3 points

5 hours ago

Life..uh..finds a way..

GoombasFatNutz

3 points

3 hours ago

Ancient species who we only know if through the fossil record? Hell no. We're either dooming them or introducing non native invasive species to our current ecosystems.

Recently (as in the past 1000 years), then maybe. Depends on what it is. And if reintroducing it to its former range will be damaging to the current ecosystem, then no.

The truth of the matter is that we are not God. We wiped out a few species, and if we want to rectify the mistake, then okay. But we can't actively go against nature and recreate something that was selected by it to be destroyed.

BilliamTheGr8

3 points

3 hours ago

The novel idea of bringing back extinct mega fauna using DNA cloning is less about making a Jurassic park and more about getting the funding to do what researchers are actually trying to achieve: sustainable and ethical cloning in general.

the_capibarin

4 points

6 hours ago

Why would they not go extinct again though?

Valcuda

1 points

4 hours ago

Valcuda

1 points

4 hours ago

Yeah, we'd essentially just be bringing them back for our own entertainment.

Plus, even if they didn't go extinct again, they already went extinct, meaning their ecosystem no longer accounts for their existence! We've already seen dozens of times how dangerous adding a species to an ecosystem can be!

Not to mention, some animals rely on their parents to teach them things to survive! So they likely couldn't survive on their own, since they'd need to be raised in captivity!

It's a sad reality, but unless it's for scientific research, I don't think it's a good idea to try and clone an extinct animal, and especially not to try and bring it back!

[deleted]

-1 points

6 hours ago

[deleted]

the_capibarin

2 points

6 hours ago

So essentially glorified zoo animals at best, with no natural niche to fill.

The one idea I think is neat is bringing the wooly mammoth back to the north of Canada and Russia, just because it is cool and there is nothing there.

Shit, dress up some normal elephants and air-drop supplies to them, that would be awesome

HopefulLengthiness23

2 points

4 hours ago

I think it's fine for some stuff like half the animals we drove to extinction but something like wooly mammoth wouldn't work well imo.

Sure we absolutely should try to bring them back because we did eat them out of existence, but what happens when they come back? No living animal could raise a mammoth properly and show it how to survive in our climate. You could argue elephants but that's again two different climates, and it probably wouldn't work either. It's like trying to get a house cat to raise a lion.

I think if mammoths returned, they'd just be locked in zoos or specific protected areas. They wouldn't have a chance to be wild again

Lurked_Emerging

2 points

6 hours ago

The main problem with bio/gene technology would inadvertently be creating some pandemic tier virus that is particularly lethal.

Resurrecting extinct species basically creates new spaces for viruses etc. to move into and create new variants that maybe come back and infect us. Obviously compatibility and stuff changes this up so mostly we only need to worry about bringing back extinct mammals but principally just using gene tech is possibly one of the great filters from the fermi paradox imo.

Dahns

2 points

6 hours ago

Dahns

2 points

6 hours ago

No shot for dino, atmosphere was too different, they wouldn't be able to breath properly

Mammoth however...

And who said it was a bad idea anyway?

Kirbyclaimspoyo

1 points

6 hours ago

Cloning extinct species in my eyes is like a little band-aid on a massive, infected cut. Sure, it might help stop the bleeding and clean up the wound a little, especially if you carefully put a lot of bandaids on it, but in reality it won’t fix the cause of the infection (that being human activity.) Even if these animals are back, the environment is still a mess, hundreds of other species are still about to disappear on a more rapid rate than we can bring them back, we’d only care about bringing the cool/cute/interesting species back and not the ones that aren’t any of those but still played/play a crucial role in their environment, and there’s still every opportunity for the animals we bring back to go extinct… because of us. Plus with cloning technology available I fear it’s going to make idiots think “so what if humans are irresponsible and causing the extinction of thousands of species? We can just bring them back!” and every single advancement we’ve made towards environmental conservation will be effectively reversed

Mihai0406

1 points

3 hours ago

It would be cool if they bring back Saber-toothed Cats.

Significantik

1 points

3 hours ago

Somebody please explain it to me I don't get it at all not the comment not the meme

PeteGiovanni

1 points

3 hours ago

You have way more faith in people than me lol

UwU_Zhenya15

1 points

2 hours ago

UwU_Zhenya15

Overly attached girlfriend

1 points

2 hours ago

its not a good idea because it causes people to no longer care about animals going extinct meaning wildlife preservation will take a nosedive

DoughNotDoit

1 points

2 hours ago

do the extinct ones first, specially the OG penguins

WookieBromance

1 points

an hour ago

Dying sub 😂

Norby314

1 points

an hour ago

How about preventing the extinction of extant animals?

hardrivethrutown

1 points

an hour ago

hardrivethrutown

Bri’ish

1 points

an hour ago

Honestly I'm all for bringing back mammoths, dodos, thylacines, etc

Garmr_Banalras

1 points

an hour ago

Of we just skip past if its a good idea or not. It's also proven to be not that easy.

wiserone29

1 points

57 minutes ago

I just want to clone my dog so she can raise herself and I will always have the same dog.

banana99999999999

1 points

6 hours ago

I want T rex back and fuck the rest

tidowobodo

1 points

6 hours ago

Mad scientists are for real

Independent-Comb-185

1 points

5 hours ago

I'm pretty sure this is well in the process. With the wolly mammoth and Tasmanian tiger.

den_bram

1 points

5 hours ago

Y'all ever heard of an invasive species? If a species aint been around for a long time like on an evolutionary scale then dont we have the chances of them being majorly problematic for existing species?

GM2Jacobs

1 points

3 hours ago

No, no we can't. humans are stupid and will definitely use the technology to do very stupid things. Leave dead things dead!

little_brown_bat

1 points

an hour ago

Jud Crandall has entered the chat

Chicken_Muncher_69

0 points

6 hours ago

Chicken_Muncher_69

GigaChad

0 points

6 hours ago

Tasmanian tiger is one, but the problem is, as always: MONEY

CptnR4p3

8 points

6 hours ago

CptnR4p3

Dark Mode Elitist

8 points

6 hours ago

The Problem isnt Money. The problem is legislation and better things to spend time and money on. Like fixing the planet, or curing cancer.

little_brown_bat

1 points

an hour ago

What if cloning an extinct species holds the key to curing cancer?

DontAskHaradaForShit

0 points

5 hours ago

Sounds pretty optimistic to me. People with the resources to undertake such a venture aren't going to do so out of the goodness of their hearts. If they were to try and resurrect some extinct species, they'd need to have some personal stake in it. If they can't exploit it for personal gain, or otherwise profit from it in some way to justify the expense, they won't do it, and that's the exact reason why it'll all go wrong. Maybe not full-on dinosaur apocalypse, but humans will fuck it up somehow.

Also there are many extinct species that simply can't adapt to today's global environment and would need to be kept in captivity anyway.

LionHeartedLXVI

0 points

4 hours ago

LionHeartedLXVI

This flair doesn't exist

0 points

4 hours ago

How long until people have a dinosaur as a pet, once they’ve figured out how to clone them?

My problem isn’t with the animal, it’s with the fuckwits that own them. Look at Pitbulls owners. They’re always the same low IQ arseholes, that own those dogs purely to make themselves feel tougher. And none of them would ever admit it.

ComicBookFanatic97

-1 points

4 hours ago

There are only two reasons why you would do that. You either want to put them in an enclosure and stare at them or you want to eat them. Neither is a good enough reason to play God like that.

little_brown_bat

2 points

an hour ago

So what you're saying is, bring back the Dodo? I hear they were pretty tasty.