De-extinction

if anything we should be making more species extinct, like mosquitos, pitbulls and brazilians

we should attempt it. while also preserving samples of endangered species.

if we can bring back the Dodo, or a Mammoth. then we can bring back anything else we have viable dna samples of..

Sounds like a lot of fun. We should definitely do it.

>>8949777
No we have enough problems with invasives.

>>8949777
keep the DNA on record, and once we become a K1 civilization, make an orbital habitat for them to live in

They died becouse of natural selection. Dont be a feeling based intellectual hippie

File: dodoclone.jpg (36KB, 636x451px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 636x451px

>>8949777
>or focus our efforts on more pressing issues
Never understood this sort of argument.

I mean, yes, there are certainly more pressing issues, but it's not as if all the science is being done by one guy in a basement somewhere. We have enough science guys to go around and *gasp* work on more than one thing at a time. (Though usually I see this used in reference to "solving all the problems on Earth" before we work on leaving it.)

Triggering aside, depending on how long they've been extinct, it could be quite dangerous. Not just if they got into the wild and fucked with eco systems, or, well, Jurassic Park, but they may interact with viruses in such a way as to bring back long dead viruses, or even spawn all new ones, that may be communicable. (Though, I suppose, the further removed genetically from humans the less risk there is of this.)

We probably can't bring back anything particularly ancient though. We have some well preserved dodos and other minor extinct species, maybe a mammoth or two - but one does not recreate a dinosaur from a mosquito in amber by substituting frog DNA. We'd probably learn more from the effort than we did from the resulting creature.

>>8949777

Try to stop living species going extinct first.

>>8950967

Feelings evolved from natural selection too, jackass.

>>8950993
That's an economic and political problem, not a science problem.

Though bringing an extinct species back would give you a more solid idea of what one would need to preserve from those that are going to go extinct to resurrect them later, in terms of variety of samples.

>>8951000
You can't do science based of muh fee fees.

The animals are dead. Cloning is banned. Nothing can be done.

File: mario-and-yoshi-wii-u-yoshi-31105155-480-480[1].png (109KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 480x480px

>>8950990

This. It sort of reminds me of all the NASA spin-off technologies. Most people alive today will never go to space, but they still benefit every day from many of the technologies developed in the pursuit of space travel. I see the same thing happening with de-extinction-- most people will never see a "revived" species other than at a zoo, but they could benefit tremendously from the information gained about genetics and medicine.
>I also want to ride an elephant bird
pic related

>>8950967
C'mon, you know you want to see a wooly mammoth at the zoo.

>>8949777
Yes itd be awesome to see a mammoth irl. I want to know what they taste like.

File: surprises.jpg (58KB, 650x650px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 650x650px

>>8949777
I really want them to bring back the american chestnut.

>>8949777
>should we revive extinct animals

And how exactly would we do that?

>>8951511
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2298805/Scientists-want-bring-24-animals-extinction-Dodos-make-list--dinosaur-DNA-old-Jurassic-Park-isnt-option.html

(I know, Dailymail - but if you ask sci-fi question, you get sci-fi answer.)

>>8949777
Recent species, maybe. Not older ones though, the re-born species need to function properly in present ecosystems. Though of course you could just keep small populations of them for novelty and maybe study purposes.

>>8951511
Well there has only been one case of a "successful" de-extinction.

There is a small summary of the experiment here:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/02/090210-bucardo-clone.html

>>8949777
Only if we can definitely identify a niche that they can fill. Otherwise we'll either have an animal which serves no natural purpose and is going to end up as a drain on resources, or an invasive species that damages the ecosystem.

>>8951105
Cloning is banned literally because of feels

>>8950960
>make an orbital habitat for them to live in
Good idea we should also build habitats for other species like tigers, dodos, sharks, feminist, Mexicans and sjws

File: 1409789874667.gif (352KB, 499x289px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 499x289px

>tfw you never got it see the Dodo or the Tasmanian Tiger

It's not fair. Bring them back.