Jurassic Park, reality?

[ordos45]

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/08/21/clone.mammoth/index.html

Japanese scientists plan to clone a wooly mammoth to put in a theme park in Siberia! What do you all think about the possibility of this real life Jurassic Park? What are the implications of this if the cloning process is a success? Is this morally wrong?

[Acriku]

Not that what happened in JP is what would happen here, but there are large number of risks. First off is it's environment, it wouldn't be able to adapt that quickly with predisposed genes adapted to harsh cold environments, or atleast I wouldn't think so. But if they do manage to have it living normally in a large (large so it's instincts don't dumb down to where animals today in zoos have) area with many biological communities for food and various interactions like the alligator has it's interactions with one type of bird to feed one and clean the other, etc. So many risks, yet can be a breakthrough in the science we know it as today.

Morally wrong? Depends on what we do with it or to it.

In 2 years we'll be gathering frogs to make dino blood ;) Jk

[DjCiD]

i wonder what wooly mammoth taste like... hmmmm taste like frog legs ;D

i remember watching a special a few years back about them finding the wooly and all that... now they are gonna try and clone it.... well i think cloning could be very bad for the human species as a whole.... morally? well i get a sinking feeling that as we advance our search for knowledge, we may open a can of whoop ass we didnt mean too (kinda like jurassic park) but who knows....

[TMA_1]

lol its just science fiction. Cloning is a lot more complicated then just transplanting DNA into a host cell and watching it grow. There are too many veriables to allow this to successfully work. I doubt it ever will happen.

[DjCiD]

well if it did work imagine how many staring ppl we could feed in 3rd world countries with a wooly mammoth... mmmmmm taste like chicken ;D

[nemafakei]

"Japanese scientists plan to clone a wooly mammoth "

Hmm. I heard that 5 years ago. At that time, a scientist had found some useable sperm with which he planned to make it work. So I don't know what has happened since then.

[DjCiD]

Chef- "Kids dont you know pig and elephant DNA just wont splice... Dont you remember that lover boy song?"

South Park Episode: Elephant {EXPLETIVE DELETED} A Pig

"tonite is the night for love...."

[Gobalopper]

They said it would take 50 years to finish fully which is a long time away still. And why Siberia, Canada is cold enough. :)

[Edric O]

This is GREAT news! But while cloning a Mammoth might be the most lucrative thing to do, I hope they also turn their attention to other extinct species, species that WE annihilated. Like the Tasmanian Tiger. (I heard they're planning to clone that too... they found one preserved in a museum)

[TMA_1]

From what I have heard before it would require an elephant egg for the mammoth sperm to actually work. So gob is right they would have to continually breed new elephant/mammoths to breed so that they could rid the genes of any elephant dna. Since they are the closely related. IMO Its not in man's hands to see this kind of stuff. Even if its amazing. Something wrong about it.

[ordos45]

I'd have to agree if they do this, I won't feel good about it. Men and women shouldn't play God and Goddess with creating life.

[Edric O]

True, but we're already playing God with destroying life. It seems only fair that we should try to give back to the world some of what we took away. This isn't creating a new species. It's ressurecting a dead one, a species that became extinct partially because of us.

Think of all the species we hunted to extinction. It's our duty to do everything in our power to bring them back.

[ordos45]

You bring up a good point Edric, but what if someone used the ressurection principle to clone back into existence the Neaderthals? Would bring back human ancestors be playing God too much?

[Edric O]

Cloning Neanderthals... that would be like cloning humans, which I'm totally against. Cloning animals is one thing, cloning humans is a completely different matter.

[ordos45]

I would have to agree with you once again, but where in human ancestory would the line between human and animal blur? When would it be acceptable?

(No I'm not going after you like a shark sensing blood, I can use this stuff for a paper on cloning later.)

[Edric O]

Just to be on the safe side, I'd say all the way back to Australopithecus.

[TMA_1]

Whoa... Scientifically, cloning offers many great things. Health benefits, scientific study, etc etc. That doesnt make it correct though. Neanderthal man has been found false as a missing link. The one's like lucy and others are what scientists are looking at. Pretty silly because there is no missing link. Back to the subject. Cloning is possible but just because it is doesnt mean its right. Just because animals dont have a conscious soul doesnt mean that they are souless. IMO all mammal life should be kept safe. They have a soul as well. It talks about that in Ecclesiasties.

If man does it or not God will eventually return and judge everything.lol so its all good either way.

[ordos45]

But would a cloned animal have a soul?

[TMA_1]

of course. God breathes the breath of life into all that requires it. God is not the author of confusion.

[Terror]

well you see i'm dying to see a mammoth or dino in real life but moraly i don't think it's good so i would have to vote against cloning, even like this

[Timenn]

Yes, they were extinct due evolution. They were extinct because other species took it's place.

And with us, human, we are doing a other thing. Those animals does not dissappear because we are their next step in evolution, but because our arrogant way of living.

And we shouldn't bring back any specie, but we should consider, or even better CHANGE, our way of living. And also stop the termination of a lot of species.

[TMA_1]

agreed timenn. Not about the evolution thing though.lol One other thing. People think that somehow animals are inferior. The problem is they do Gods work better than us. Though we are cared for and loved more than animals. They still are a good model to watch. They always do God's work better than we can. Its ironic to see that an inferior group of beings can do better than us at times.

[Acriku]

Well that whole theory is based on your view of what "better" is, IMO better is more advanced, and able to adapt quicker and more efficiently. So humans come in first woooo.

[TMA_1]

I believe bacteria is the most adaptable. They have survived through everything and have larger populations than man. That includes many of other animals.

[Acriku]

That may be so, that sometimes the most simple organisms survive, but I would also factor in how advanced the subject is. Humans win woo ;)