[Discussion] The Possibility of Cloning Extinct Species

[Digimon Kaiser]

I'm not talking about dinosaurs here, but species much more recently extinct.

Like Woolly Mammoths, Tasmanian Wolves and Dodos, among other species humans had at least some role in extinction.

Do you think we'll see some of these in our lifetime?

Cloning a Woolly Mammoth may take quite a while, but scientists are slowly working on it, using an Indian Elephant as a surrogate mother, apparently.

[Airbourne Bubblun]

I'm pretty sure we will, because the DNA in most recent animals that are extinct are undamaged. Dinosaurs, may be a very slim chance because the DNA may be already damaged, with them living millions of years ago.

[Sassy Milkshake]

I may just be behind on my modern science, but are we able to clone non-extinct species lol?

[Pinkie-Dawn]

But Wooly Mammoths can't survive in the current temperature due to their fur, so there's no point of bringing them back.

Originally Posted by Sassy Milkshake

I may just be behind on my modern science, but are we able to clone non-extinct species lol?

Yes, for example: Dolly the Sheep.

[Shiny Celebi]

I think they are only doing this to study the Mammoth. I dont think they actually want to bring back the whole species. It'll be interesting I guess to see if they're successful and it survives.

[⊗Slenderman⊗]

Seriously is anyone else thinking of the whole Mew/Mewtwo thing with this? o; Things didn't seem to go very well that time so.

It's interesting. I wonder if (assuming they attempt to actually clone them) people will try to have them living in the wild. Or if they will try to modify things so their survival will be easier.

[Insomniac]

I think that the whole wooly mammoth thing might work, but dinosaurs? Ehhh, maybe not.
With further research and about a century's time of work? Maybe.

But it is possible to clone things, like sheep and goats. So maybe in the future this will be a common thing.

[TRIFORCE89]

On one hand, it'd be cool. On the other hand, Jurassic Park has taught me that it's a bad idea XD

[SwiftSign]

As much as it's one of Science's fantasies it is pretty much a waste of time and money.

Making one clone isn't enough to make a sustainable population, even making 10 clones from different pieces of DNA isn't enough really.

It's just a show-off project, even the chances of finding intact Mammoth DNA are slim, limited to very icy regions where there might be a frozen Mammoth somewhere.

[Scarf]

I don't believe DNA can survive long enough for us to have any dinosaur DNA left. Looking for the article.

Ah, here it is.

Originally Posted by the article

The team predicts that even in a bone at an ideal preservation temperature of −5 ºC, effectively every bond would be destroyed after a maximum of 6.8 million years. The DNA would cease to be readable much earlier — perhaps after roughly 1.5 million years, when the remaining strands would be too short to give meaningful information.

So no dinosaurs possible as far as our understanding of DNA goes. Even if we're really off it's hard to imagine we're so far off that we really could have dino DNA left.

[Rococo]

Strangled Red
Jurassic Park
Fullmetal Alchemist

'Nuff said.

[PiemanFiddy]

Well, I don't think cloning is going to happen ANYTIME within this century.

If it does, color me surprised, because then we'll have like 3 of every person on the same planet and our population will skyrocket.

[Razor Leaf]

Originally Posted by SwiftSign

As much as it's one of Science's fantasies it is pretty much a waste of time and money.

Making one clone isn't enough to make a sustainable population, even making 10 clones from different pieces of DNA isn't enough really.

It's just a show-off project, even the chances of finding intact Mammoth DNA are slim, limited to very icy regions where there might be a frozen Mammoth somewhere.

So much this. Cloning extinct animals is... yeah, pretty pointless. I mean it might tell us some stuff about past earth, but what exactly? Say we cloned a mammoth - we can see that it's got, for example, a thick wooly coat to protect it from the cold. That's great, but we knew that already. We've pieced enough together as it is to understand how the world used to be from other sources so really... cloning something extinct would just be a one-off thing to show that it can be done. And given that we've already cloned animals which aren't currently extinct, we already know that it can be done anyway, assuming we found intact DNA from the species to be cloned. I just don't see a point either.

Originally Posted by PiemanFiddy

Well, I don't think cloning is going to happen ANYTIME within this century.

If it does, color me surprised, because then we'll have like 3 of every person on the same planet and our population will skyrocket.

There'd be massive ethical issues with cloning humans anyway (I might go make a discussion about that...), but as for cloning in general, it has happened before and work is still being done with it. So yeah, it's definitely going to happen more in this century. d:

[AzaleaLightning]

I'm a little anti-science as far as interfering with nature's courses, but I really don't think it should be considered.

It could have serious repercussions if you interfere with a species; let's say they want to increase the tiger population by cloning 10% of them, that percentage is small but those tigers would likely be reintroduced into the wild and sometime down the line, inbreeding deformities could become an issue unless they were careful about where and when they reintroduced them. However, that drastic increase in the natural population could really throw off the ecosystem dramatically.

[Squidchan]

I don't like the idea of cloning extinct or endangered species because although we could be fixing our mistakes in regards to those we've hunted to extinction, or ruination of habitat, I think that these consequences help to make sure we don't do it again. If we were to perfect cloning, no-one would hold back when hunting animals because 'it's OK, we can just clone them back'.

[Yoshikkko]

There's a reason those animals are extinct. Dodos? They're extinct because they are stupid. What's the point in cloning that? Instead of wanting to revive extinct species, they should invest money in trying to prevent more species from going extinct like polar bears and whales. Jesus what a waste of money.

Originally Posted by PiemanFiddy

Well, I don't think cloning is going to happen ANYTIME within this century.

If it does, color me surprised, because then we'll have like 3 of every person on the same planet and our population will skyrocket.

I think it will. Also, no we wouldn't have 3 of every person? Why would they even do that? Besides, you can't clone personality. They would only look the same.

[PiemanFiddy]

Originally Posted by Yoshikkko

There's a reason those animals are extinct. Dodos? They're extinct because they are stupid. What's the point in cloning that? Instead of wanting to revive extinct species, they should invest money in trying to prevent more species from going extinct like polar bears and whales. Jesus what a waste of money.



I think it will. Also, no we wouldn't have 3 of every person? Why would they even do that? Besides, you can't clone personality. They would only look the same.

Well first off, I want to reply to the first post you made. Dodos are stupid? What kind of reason is that to keep them from resurrection? Dogs & Cats are stupid too. Also, how is it a waste of money? I imagine the whole Cloning thing and the Extinction Prevention Squad are two completely different organizations which have a completely different budget/salary. It shouldn't be a waste of money either way.

...and in reply to the quote:

The whole "3 of every person" thing is an exaggeration to show that with Cloning material, we could genetically reproduce an identical copy of ourselves. Now who out there WOULDN'T agree to doing that? Maybe it won't be public, and maybe it won't be serious.

Also who said anything about cloning personalities? I never implied that, I just implied that there was going to be an abundance of our species if we ever got a hold of that technology in the PUBLIC. Then it becomes an issue.

[Forever]

I think it's a good idea. Why not bring back something you once thought was dead? I mean, if someone died too early, and you had the technology to bring them back, wouldn't you do it, even if it's wasting money as some of you say? For one I'd like to be able to see those animals in my lifetime, as it'd just show how amazing technology is... it'd be so awesome.

[Shiny Celebi]

I dont think its a good idea. Im not comfortable with cloning extinct species just because we can. What purpose would the animal have in the world? Just to be studied or sit in a zoo? The fact is the world has changed since these species went extinct and may not be able to adapt to the current world and might not survive, so what's the point?

[Yoshikkko]

Originally Posted by PiemanFiddy

Well first off, I want to reply to the first post you made. Dodos are stupid? What kind of reason is that to keep them from resurrection? Dogs & Cats are stupid too.
[...]
I never implied that, I just implied that there was going to be an abundance of our species if we ever got a hold of that technology in the PUBLIC. Then it becomes an issue.

Uh what? I'll explain it more clearly to you if you don't understand; Dodos went extinct because whenever they were in danger they would call out to their friends and they would actually come too, and thus get all of them killed instead of just the initial one or two. This is stupid literally, this is not a good surviving strategy obviously. It's called natural selection. And oh my god wtf? Dogs and cats are not stupid? One of the main reasons dogs and cats are still here because they aren't. I'm not going to go on about this because it's a whole other discussion.

And secondly, there would not be an "abundance of our species if we ever got a hold of that technology in the PUBLIC". How do you think clones are born? Do you think they are just instantly a copy of the person they were cloned from like in the Pokémon movie? They would have to be born and raised just like any other human being, so no, it wouldn't cause an abundance because it would just be any other baby that was born because it takes as much effort.

Exactly what Shiny Celebi said too.

[PiemanFiddy]

Originally Posted by Yoshikkko

Uh what? I'll explain it more clearly to you if you don't understand; Dodos went extinct because whenever they were in danger they would call out to their friends and they would actually come too, and thus get all of them killed instead of just the initial one or two. This is stupid literally, this is not a good surviving strategy obviously. It's called natural selection. And oh my god wtf? Dogs and cats are not stupid? One of the main reasons dogs and cats are still here because they aren't. I'm not going to go on about this because it's a whole other discussion.

And secondly, there would not be an "abundance of our species if we ever got a hold of that technology in the PUBLIC". How do you think clones are born? Do you think they are just instantly a copy of the person they were cloned from like in the Pokémon movie? They would have to be born and raised just like any other human being, so no, it wouldn't cause an abundance because it would just be any other baby that was born because it takes as much effort.

Exactly what Shiny Celebi said too.

Well I guess dodos are irrelevant at this point then. Since everyone is getting hyped up about Polar Bear extinction and Other wildlife, then they may as well focus on that.

You say there won't be an abudance of our species because... we won't be adults when we're cloned? We'll be babies? What exactly determines the age of the result of a cloned experiment? I'd like a little more clarification on that.

...and saying it takes as much effort is just ridiculous. How can you say something like a cloning device would take the SAME effort as someone who's pregnant? You think it's just going to sit in that tank for 8 months before it's finished? I don't know about that. We have the technology to speed up growth like that.


Oh and what you and shiny Celebi said:

What happens when Deer, Cow, Chickens and etc. go extinct? What then? Are you gonna sit there and tell me the same thing, because then you might as well be calling us all Vegans.

[Shiny Celebi]

I dont see Deer, Cows and such going extinct anytime soon. They arent endangered or extinct. We're talking about brining back species that have been extinct for millions of years and whether we should do so or not. If a Wolly Mammoth was cloned, what would it do? Could it survive in the world? is there food that it could eat, etc, so on and so forth, that is the point Im trying to make. The things we do like this dont just affect us.

[PiemanFiddy]

Originally Posted by Shiny Celebi

I dont see Deer, Cows and such going extinct anytime soon. They arent endangered or extinct. We're talking about brining back species that have been extinct for millions of years and whether we should do so or not. If a Wolly Mammoth was cloned, what would it do? Could it survive in the world? is there food that it could eat, etc, so on and so forth, that is the point Im trying to make. The things we do like this dont just affect us.

I never said anything about cloning a Wolly Mammoth. If we did have the resources to clone it, I don't see it being much of an issue. We could always just clone one, test food on it, and if It dies, we know it can't survive in this world. Experimentation never hurt anyone :/

[Yoshikkko]

Originally Posted by PiemanFiddy

Well I guess dodos are irrelevant at this point then. Since everyone is getting hyped up about Polar Bear extinction and Other wildlife, then they may as well focus on that.

You say there won't be an abudance of our species because... we won't be adults when we're cloned? We'll be babies? What exactly determines the age of the result of a cloned experiment? I'd like a little more clarification on that.

...and saying it takes as much effort is just ridiculous. How can you say something like a cloning device would take the SAME effort as someone who's pregnant? You think it's just going to sit in that tank for 8 months before it's finished? I don't know about that. We have the technology to speed up growth like that.

[...]

Yeah so what I said initially.

"We won't be adults when we're cloned?" I'm sorry but this is the most dense question I've ever heard. Are you actually trying to argue that a clone does not have to be born? I think you've watched too many movies. How do you think it would go? You think if I would be cloned, there would just be an identical double of me that is me in age, experience, emotions and so on? NO NO NO. I don't think you understand the realistic concept of cloning. A clone in the real world will never be more than just a replica of someone else's genes. A clone is not a robot, it would still be a human being that has to be born. Yes it would be born in a lab, and as it would be growing up it would look exactly the same as the person it was cloned from. Cloning does not mean to just duplicate another creature, that only happens in movies.

[PiemanFiddy]

Originally Posted by Yoshikkko

Yeah so what I said initially.

"We won't be adults when we're cloned?" I'm sorry but this is the most foolish question I've ever heard. I think you've watched too many movies. How do you think it would go? You think if I would be cloned, there would just be an identical double of me that is me in age, experience, emotions and so on? NO NO NO. I don't think you understand the realistic concept of cloning. A clone in the real world will never be more than just a replica of someone else's genes. A clone is not a robot, it would still be a human being that has to be born. Yes it would be born in a lab, and as it would be growing up it would look exactly the same as the person it was cloned from. Cloning does not mean to just duplicate another creature, that only happens in movies.

It doesn't have to have a personality. That's completely irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make, and if it was, I would like a clear explanation as to why a clone wouldn't have that attribute. If it uses my same genetic code and everything, then I really just don't see what's wrong with it.

I never said a clone would be a robot or a lifeless being either. I'm just saying that if our technology is advanced enough to the point where we can successfully clone a human being, then we should be able to speed up the growth process. It shouldn't take 8 months to grow another one of 'me' if it uses a different scientific method thing. It's all up to them really.

As for not being an adult, yeah I guess that makes more sense now. I don't see why it would be impossible though. Once again, if it uses my same genetic code, it could very easily grow to the same height and proportionate body size within the allotted time of 'completion'.

But I suppose... or I GUESS it doesn't work that way. I guess I HAVE been watching too many movies... despite me never seeing a movie about human/animal cloning before.