Cloning Extinct Animals
It may now be possible to bring back extinct species by cloning dead specimens, and growing them in the wombs of similar or related animals.
Not long ago, the idea of cloning extinct animals sounded like science fiction. Films like Jurassic Park, made it seem plausible, but science was far behind the special effects, and the only rebuilt Dinosaur species existed on the movie screen. But now advances in cloning technology promise to turn science fiction into reality and make it possible to clone extinct animals such as mammoths or even, one day, dinosaurs.
How Cloning Works
To understand how cloning might be used to restore dead animals and even bring back extinct species it is important to understand how cloning works, and what it can and cannot do.
Cloning is the process of creating an identical copy of an oragnism or part of an organism. There are many different types of cloning and cloning techniques. Of interest here is the method called reproductive cloning which uses "somatic cell nuclear transfer" (SCNT) to create animals that are genetically identical. In this process, genetic material (namely the nucleus of a cell) from the animal that is being copied is transferred into an egg of a female mammal.
The egg is not fertilized in the normal way, in that no spermatazoa enter the egg. However, the egg begins to divide as if it had been fertilized, and reproduces the DNA of the copied animal. The egg is then implanted into the womb of a surrogate mother and grows into a fetus and eventually an identical baby copy of the original animal.
This method of cloning has some similarities to in vitro fertilization used to make "test tube" babies in that the fertilization of the egg takes place in a lab. The egg is implanted with the genetic material using state of the art tools. However, it is much more complex and difficult that the normal in vitro fertilization because instead of using sperm to fertilize an egg, the genetic material of the donor animal must be extracted intact from its cells and then implanted into the egg.
Cloning Animals is Difficult
Cloning an animal is very difficult. The first cloned mammal (there may have been an earlier successful cloning of a fish and a tadpole in China) was Dolly the Sheep. This success came after many failures. Most attempts to fertilize eggs through the cloning process failed to produce a pregnancy, and of the eggs that were fertilized most ended in miscarriages. The scientific team that produced the Dolly, first cloned sheep, reported that it took 277 eggs to produce 29 sheep embryos; of these only three survived until birth, and only one of these three - Dolly - lived for any length of time after birth.
Despite these difficulties, the cloning of Dolly the Sheep proved that genetic material from an adult cell could be used to grow an identical copy, or clone, of the entire organism.
Attempts to Clone Extinct Animals
Every time that a species dies, an important piece of our environment and our world dies with it. But science offers the hope of bringing some of these species back from extinction by using genes taken from the tissues of dead animals to grow new animals.
Several attempts have been made to regrow dead and extinct animals, so far with little success. The holy grail of extinct species cloning would be to bring back to life a dinosaur or a prehistoric animal such as a mamoth. So far, extracting DNA from fossilized dinosaur bones has proved difficult. But obtaining viable DNA from mammoth caracasses looks more promising since many mammoths have been found frozen virtually intact in the Siberian permafrost.
However, attempts to extract intact DNA from the frozen bodies of Wooly Mamoths found in the Russian trundra have so far proved unsuccessful. There is currently a joint Russian - Japanese project working on the project. If DNA is extracted it would be inserted into the egg of a large mammal such as a cow or an elephant in the hopes that the surrogate mother could carry the baby mammoth to term.
There have also been attempts to clone a Tasmanian Tiger, which has been extinct for 65 years, but it was found that the DNA from the stuffed museum specimens that still exist had degraded too badly to create a viable fetus.
Now, scientists are taking steps to collect and preserve tissue from endangered animals in order to attempt clone them in the future, once the technology improves. When the last Pyrenan Ibex died, tissue samples were frozen immediately in the hopes of recreating the species at a later date.
A number of so-called frozen zoos now store genetic material from endangered species. The zoos are cryogenic facilities in which tissue, eggs, and sperm from threatened species are stored for later cloning or use in reproduction programs using artificial insemination. Two of the main facilities are the Frozen Zoo at the San Diego Zoo and the Audubon Center for Research of Endangered Species. Both of these gene banks may one day furnish the DNA needed to bring species back from oblivion.
- How to Clone an Extinct Animal
This site describes the basic steps to clone extinct animals, as well as efforts to recreate the Tasmanian Tiger.
- Should Cloning be Used to Bring Back Extinct Species? | Permaculture magazine
To clone or not to clone? This is the question on the lips of scientists and conservationists around the world, as researchers now have the ability to bring extinct species back from the dead. They are calling it de-extinction. The other question is
- De-Extinction - Bringing Extinct Species Back to Life - Pictures, News, TEDx Conference
A special National Geographic News series on bringing extinct species back to life.
- Cloning Dinosaurs
This site examines how dinosaurs might be cloned.
Can We Clone Extinct Animals Such as Dinosaurs or Mammoths
Bringing dinosaurs or prehistoric mammoths back to life would be amazing. But so far the only successful clones have been of living animals. The reason is that in order for a clone to be successful the "seed" DNA implanted into the host egg must be intact. If it is damaged, the DNA will lack important information needed to make the egg develop into a complete organism.
While DNA has been recovered from mammoth caracasses and attempts have been made to harvest dinosaur DNA, the samples that have been recovered so far have been too degraded to be useful. The fact that the dead animal is thousands of years old (or millions in the case of dinosaurs) means that the genetic material has been exposed to many decomposing factors such as weather, bacteria, and time. So far, our cloning technology has not advanced to the point where we can collect enough DNA to pull off the holy grail of cloning: bring a species into the world that no human being has seen within recorded history. Such an achievement would be a triumph for science and teach us a great deal about evolution and the development of species. Just think what we could learn if we had a living dinosaur to study!
The successes that have been achieved so far point to a bright future for cloning and hope for restoring lost species.
Cloning Dinosaurs and Extinct Animals.
What do you think? Should we tamper with Mother Nature? What are some of the risks and benefist of re-introducing species that have not been part of the environment for thousands or even millions of years?
Could cloning extinct species bring back unwanted diseases or parasites that might threaten the existence of modern species?
Have Your Say
Should We Do It?
Just because we may be able to clone extinct animals and bring a species back to life, doesn't mean that we should do it? Would we be playing god and undermining the balance of nature? After all, there is a reason that these animals became extinct and most of these creatures, such as dinosaurs and giant reptiles no longer have any place in the current environment. It is possible that they might escape and cause havoc.
But a more likely scenario is that any extinct animal which is successfully brought back to life, especially something as exotic as a dinosaur, would be exhibited in a sort of modern day freak show and spend the rest of its life in a cage surrounded by gawking school children. After all, pure science costs money and no one wants to invest in these technologies without the hope of a pay off.
It would be sad indeed to see a proud T-rex pacing a tiny zoo enclosure, while humans - something foreign to its species - take pictures of it and make funny noises trying to imitate its calls to other dinosaurs, who have not existed on this planet for millions of years.
Join This Author's Fan Club and Be Notified When New Articles Are Published.
mimi45 on June 18, 2014:
Cloning these creatures could be possible, but can we live with them? for example: dinosaurs are giants, how could we survive if we are known as food for the carnivores? and the mammoth could become aggressive against us since our ancestors was huting them for resources.
infnity144 on June 04, 2013:
I think before they bring up the dinos they should first revive present animals like the dodo or tasmanian tiger
eddie on April 15, 2013:
"I think it is unatural to bring back extinct animals. What if bringing them back bring dedly diseases back? What if those animals are nothing we expect them to be? I think if god made them extinct, they should stay extinct."
I know gnate wrote this 6 weeks ago, but I still have to comment.
I don't think you deserve an opinion if you can't spell deadly right (sure, it was a typo...). God didn't make them all extinct, we did.
Also, god doesn't exist, its a fairy tale, like Santa and the tooth fairy.
eddie on April 15, 2013:
totally biased poll.
Philosopher on April 10, 2013:
Wow! Spell check dude! It's always a good idea to extensively proof ANYTHING, including blog posts, before publishing. I personally found this to be a bland, barely scientific article completely tainted with the author's personal bias. Reading through the comments has also caused me much headaches. It seems that many people are interested only in bringing back extinct animals for human pleasure and not taking the interests of the animal, or species, into account.
asecret45 on March 28, 2013:
true enough God made them extinct I think god made them extinct so mankind can one-day settle their own curiosity after all God gave us free will
gnate55 on February 28, 2013:
I think it is unatural to bring back extinct animals. What if bringing them back bring dedly diseases back? What if those animals are nothing we expect them to be? I think if god made them extinct, they should stay extinct.
Robert P (author) from Canada on August 27, 2012:
I think that whether or not bringing back extinct species is a good idea depends on how far back we go. Bringing back a recently extinct species would probably help restore the balance of nature, especially if we caused its extinction. But cloning a species that has been extinct for thousands of years may have unintended consequences. When species go extinct, other species take their place in the food chain. If we reintroduced one species, there may not be room for the ones that came after it, and this may cause unintended and even disastrous consequences. An example would be what happened in Australia when settlers released rabbits into the wild. With almost no natural enemies, the rabbits bred like crazy and upset the local ecology. It is possible that something like this might happen if a resurrected species were reintroduced into the wild.
Terry/// on August 27, 2012:
Bringing back to life extinct species is an amazing thing to comprehend and a truly remarkable thing to consider, so please tell me how can anyone think it is wrong? Especially for the species who met their fate due to our doing. I do think there are many conditions to be undertaken but in the end if we have the capability then we should do so.
Jade on June 07, 2012:
Very Helpful for my homework!
Robert P (author) from Canada on June 05, 2012:
You are so right. Here is an article about a scientist planning to make artificial life forms, including bugs that take in water and pee petroleum. What could possibly go wrong?
Lil' Black Kat on June 04, 2012:
It all starts will a crazy scientist who does crazy junk he shouldn't be doing.
Robert P (author) from Canada on May 28, 2012:
I think that any dinosaur eggs out there are long passed their expiry date and would never hatch.
belever on May 26, 2012:
I have all ways dreamt the dinosaurs would come and repopulate, but this is not the wright way.I had a vision of finding a dinosaur egg and raising a three horn.
scott on May 17, 2012:
bring back the elephant bird,dodo,tasmainian wolf,quagga,cape lion,javan tiger,that ian cow and the passenger pigin and mamouths
Robert P (author) from Canada on May 15, 2012:
I agree, but I would want to see these animals roaming free in a park like preserve and not stuck in tiny cages at a zoo.
Max on May 14, 2012:
I wish that all of the really astounding extinct animals like mammoths and some bears and other carnivorous species would still be alive just for the sheer beauty and majesty of animals like those.
smiley trinidad ans on May 14, 2012:
I really hope that when they succesfully clone a dinisaur they can contain it. However I still think it is a wonderful idea.
Abhisha on May 12, 2012:
This was vry usefullllll :)
Ruby Thompson on May 01, 2012:
This is A lot of info...
Jordan Belanger on April 26, 2012:
I believe, we need to bring back extinct animals who are necessary for the earth to continue. I don't think we need Mammoths, or Dino's. They are dead for a reason. We need to save animals! There is a recently extinct species of Zebra who was native to the mountains, and the ecosystem is suffering from the loss of the animal. We need to bring back animals that we, as man kind, have destroyed. We need to genetically clone eagles, tigers, animals that matter, not dinosaurs.
int on April 23, 2012:
maybe we can do it if we take the cell of the extincts body
then trying to reproduce in an animal which is right now living.will it be possible
:) on April 19, 2012:
I think it's a great idea but it comes with a risk. I think if we are going to clone prehistoric animals, we have to do it in a way that it wont cause any damage. Some dinosaurs may be okay to clone and herbivores like mammoths are good too. But I do suggest that they try cloning the ones that are recently extinct because of us. Those are more helpful and they died because of us.
N473 on April 15, 2012:
If we kept the prehistoric creatures in special habitats like zoos,and the creatures that recently became extinct into their original habitats. I don't think we would have problems.
^_^ on April 13, 2012:
If we're gonna bring back any species of animal, it should be one that became extinct because of human's actions, not a creature that naturally died out eons ago.
Lemuria on April 11, 2012:
Crazy to think if animals can be cloned, why not an ancient type of human......
Connie on April 10, 2012:
Well, there is something that most posters here are missing, and that is that if we clone an extinct animal, no matter what species it is, it is not going to mean that species can now reproduce. And even if it could, there is only itself to reproduce with. Many clones are sterile. If they are not, they are copies of one specimen. If they breed, they are breeding with themselves. To clone extinct species like mammoths would be an interesting and educational thing, but it would sure be a cruel thing for the mammoth, don't you think? Unless several different individual mammoths could be cloned, and as long as the clones were fertile, then I suppose they could be a herd and live a natural life. But if there is only one specimen to clone from, then no possibility exists for the species to regenerate. So that one clone would have a very lonely life. I think we need to think about that part a little more. Even if a dinosaur were cloned, it would just be locked up and studied. Do we have the right to do that to a living creature? I do not think we do. just sayin...
Jeremy on April 10, 2012:
bring on the mammoths,bring on the t-rexs,i must see a real Jurassic Park!
Crazy Javan Scientist on April 10, 2012:
There isn't enough space on the planet for these long extinct species that will distrupt the ecoysytems of the world if they are re-introduced to the wild. Therefore we shouldn't be brining them back from extinction because they will cause other species to become endangered and they will probably just die out again very quickly due to the small gene pool they will have and being unadapted to this modern environment.
Robert P (author) from Canada on April 10, 2012:
@Anonymys - nom nom nom!
Anonomys on April 07, 2012:
As long as we don't put the carnivores somewhere they could escape. JpCough... PaDDOCKhack!
An angry Russian on April 04, 2012:
we should only clone the recently extinct animals like the species we have caused to go extinct by hunting them until there were none left and ones that there is only one of such as the gallopogus tortise or animals that there are only a few left such as pandas and tigers and animals that poachers go after we shouldn't be screwing around with mammoths or brontosauruses and dinosaurs only recently extinct animals !!!
dj not nice on March 30, 2012:
we do not know how they will be when they see different animal or us they could eat us or worst we could be extinct
Jordan Adams on March 22, 2012:
in conclusion whatever animal is brought back it should be placed in its old habitat or ones with similar features as well as zoos.
Joey the Great on March 21, 2012:
Well, I think that cloning mammoths or dodo birds would be a good idea. Just stay away from the dinosaurs. There's no telling what they would do.
Jordan Adams on March 21, 2012:
bringing back animasl such those who have gone extinct due to human interference like the dodo, tasmanian tiger, barbary lion, mammoth, and the Auroch would be a good idea just keep a close eye on some of the species like the mammoth, other then that it would be fine just don't recreat the dinouars because theres a reason why there gone and it should stay that way for the dinos
Darlene on March 20, 2012:
I think we shold only clone recently extinct animals like the Passenger Pigeon, Eskimo Curlew or Ivory Billed woodpecker. We should never clone any prehistoric animal. If we clone ice age animals, they would not do well in the modern world. And, dinosaurs and people were not meant to live together otherwise God would have put them together in the first place.
rip jaw on March 20, 2012:
if you guys put dino DNA into a chicken and hacth it you may create either a dino or a difrent speseis.
rip jaw on March 20, 2012:
the peaple who clone stuff should try to advance the cloning tech because after 2 years they would be millinairs.
theking2020 on March 14, 2012:
Interesting article, science continues to advance at incredible rates, I don't have one doubt that it cant be possible.
Lex Lewis on March 11, 2012:
Cloning a mammoth is one thing, as they are similar in size to modern elephants. Reproducing dinosaurs could prove disaterous, possibly upsetting the balance of the eco system. We should definitely clone endangered species though.
Robert P (author) from Canada on March 08, 2012:
@KB - Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Whether for good or bad, it seems that we will have some extinct species repopulating the earth very soon. Many published reports indicate that scientists are confident that they will be able to clone the mammoth. And who knows what will come next?
K.B. on March 08, 2012:
I really found this interesting. The possibility that we could bring back exctinct animals? It could really help endangered, threatened, and critically endangered species in the battle of extcinction. However we must consider what would happen if we did bring back dinosaurs or wooly mammoths. When we look in the past we see that introducing new species into new habitats has never been good, for example when settlers brought in livestock to places like hawaii or australia, resulting in the exctinction of many native species that could not compete with this other new species(ex. the po'ouli bird, tasmanian tiger, and many others). The tasmanian tiger could not compete with the dingos brought to australia and the po'ouli was killed by mosqitos that were brought by settlers and pigs that trampled down and ate many native plants that were important to the po'ouli. There are so many countless others that have suffered the same fate and their might be more if we introduce the dinosaurs or the wooly mammoth.Also these creatures require so much food, land, and resources that we already don't have for our species today. Not to mention ancient diseases they might bring back. But even though it would be really cool to meet a living breathing dinsosuar or mammoth think of the consequences. Instead this new science should be used to help conserve endangered species which are important in our planets ecosystem, which we need, and which is our responsibility. Hopefully it can be done.
bobby on February 23, 2012:
lighten up! I say clone anything u can, T rex whatever! clone hitler & throw him in prison! hahaha. I wish I could clone myself for spare body parts.
Me on February 22, 2012:
i want 2 see a dragon did any of u hear that they found 1
in an ice cave perfectly preserved pretty cool right
tw on February 21, 2012:
it depends on the way you look at it and if we were going to feed a t rex prisoners don't u think that its taste for human blood would come overwelming
luna on February 20, 2012:
using cloning as a way of "entertainment" is sick ..
to those people saying "you guys are so boring" ... ever think about consequences why bring something back when there are thousands of other species that are starving there is no room for more...
andy bumgardner on February 20, 2012:
YES,&Yes, Yes ,we could feed a T-REX the death row prisoners for breakfest lunch and dinner and a snack any time go science go
a on February 20, 2012:
not nesasaraly the would be in an containment
g on February 19, 2012:
no, the are extinct for a reason and would put all humans in danger!
what it all turns out too good, they breed like crazy and ruin all modern buildings, facilities etc. scientists wouldn't be so happy then, when their labs are destroyed...
gaga on February 18, 2012:
i think it would be amazing if scientists could bring extinct animals back to live but it would also be dangerous i mean just think if we had wild mammoths running around in the citys... so i think scientists should look deep in to which animals to clone
hanna on February 15, 2012:
you are right it would take some work velociraptormadguy. but if you do think we extinct some of them in the first place so its only right to put things back to the way they were. and yes dinos would be fun to live with. that's why it will take scientist just a little while to fully perfect the experiment. but glad you have an interest in dinos to.
velociraptormadguy!!!! on February 15, 2012:
I think the idea of cloning extinct animals is awsome!But just like jurassic park it may get out of hand. i personally wouldn't clone a Pterodactyl because it would fly everywhere and eat humans,besides they already have the Ropen!!!!!!! I LOVE VELOCIRAPTORS AND I KNOW ALL OF THE DINO PERIODS ON ORDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hanna on February 14, 2012:
i think they should bring back extinct animals that would be amazing. it is are faught of them went extinct in the first place
Alez on February 11, 2012:
How cute maybe i will clone a clone trooper
me on February 09, 2012:
...they cloned a t-Rex once...once...he was so cute when little...grew up, ate the scientist and died.... no record of the experiment survived.... The End
JAMES on February 08, 2012:
I really think you should try!It would be so cool!
Yo on February 06, 2012:
i think Its Dumb To Clone Other Animals they Are Supposed To Die for a Reason yeah they
mitch13 on February 05, 2012:
i asked if it was possible not what were the variables involved
Joe Dirt on February 04, 2012:
The basic premise of NOT bringing back most extinct animals would be that nature has funny ways of working. While it is nice to remember those that have gone before, there was a reason that these animals are extinct.
I see many references to Jurassic Park, which is conflicting with the lesson that was trying to be taught in that movie and those that succeeded it. Dinosaurs were large and majestic creatures, however consider that first part: large. Humans are all over the globe, and are even now pushing out nature to the farthest extremities. Were we to add an even larger set of species, where would they go? Are we going to put them in zoo's? The fences we have now are like a white picket fence to those humongous creatures, and about as strong in keeping one from escaping. Also, food is a concern. Most all sources of food to herbivore dinosaurs have become extinct as well, and I doubt that their own digestive system - something we know next to nothing about - would be able to handle today's plants.
And what about carnivores? It does not take much for us mistake-prone humans to have a repeat of either Jurassic Park one or two, where the Dino comes out and starts sampling from the buffet. I can imagine the thought process then, "A little lawyer puree, oh, gone bad. How about some old scientist bleu. OOH, a Twinkie!" Yes, that was a reference to the black gentleman missing everything but an arm.
The fact to the matter is, even if the technology develops, there is no place in today's, or tomorrow's, world. This would be the point were movie studios and animal trainers both start sobbing without a live T-Rex to be in Jurassic Park X and cause a huge scandal when the lead girl is missing. That is, who digs in the dino poo?
N/A on February 01, 2012:
I am actually doing a "Mock Trial" in school on this exact topic. I find cloning of extinct animals to be very dangerous and costly. We could end up bringing back potentially harmful bacteria, diseases, and parasites that broke down the now cloned animal. Also, it costs way to much money for our economy to handle and only every 30 out of 1000 animals are successfully cloned. That means about 30% of the embryos (that are bought by the government) are put to a good use. This is just something to consider when you are voting in the poll above.
TamedAggression on January 30, 2012:
Meat eaters & Plant eaters? Seriously? where I am from they call them carnivorous and herbivorous (bit of both equals omnivorous!) see I would like to see a Velociraptor or a Dimetrodon some day in the future, but I would prefer if we started off with something like a Compsognathus or something else small.
Allan on January 30, 2012:
Strong follower of science, so I say of course extinct species should be cloned. Just like any form of science, if you don't experiment the factual knowledge will never be gained. It may also not just serve the knowledge of cloning, but also further understand genetics and explain an awful lot, even resulting in advancing medical science.
I would love to see mammoths returned, be quite something to see an animal that no modern human has ever seen in the flesh.
Dinosaurs would be remarkable, but creating a true dinosaur is probably impossible. However I have read about reverse engineering their descendants, birds, however that'd be a long way off, as you'd need to separate millions of years of evolution from what you really want. Only other means is to in effect fill in the gaps of any DNA with new genetic codes with what should or could be there. In that case, it'd not be a true dinosaur from the past, more of a rendition of how it may have been. All that would be some years away yet, when computing power is more capable. In essence, it'd be like how the dinosaurs were described in Jurassic Park 3 'genetically engineered [theme park] monsters'.
One thing to consider when thinking about it being against nature, is that everything built by humans is effectively our nature. I don't believe in the term playing god, since nature allowed us to develop to what we are today, everything we do is our own act as a result of years of natural evolution. But that is not to say we should just carry on destroying the planet because its in out nature, we have an evolved sensibility to understand and realise what is happening precisely, and we know what is happening is not positive.
Robert P (author) from Canada on January 27, 2012:
Actually some people have already cloned their dead dogs. It is very expensive however.
Ve on January 27, 2012:
Is there a possibility that if you have a dead pet, if you have their fur or and DNA, can you clone them?
bronson on January 27, 2012:
besides it possibly biting your face off i think it would be good.
Ur mom on January 24, 2012:
Cloning dinosaurs will never happen retards
noun of ur busness on January 24, 2012:
i think that is dumb like i don't want the gov or the scientist to spend there money on thing that may or may not be suceful like it needs to go on other need things (i don't wanna be ate by no t-rex thanks)
noun of ur busness on January 24, 2012:
i think that is dumb like i don't want the gov or the scientist to spend there money on thing that may or may not be suceful like it needs to go on other need things (i don't wanna be ate by no t-rex thanks)
unknown on January 23, 2012:
let's clone extinct humans!!!!!!
sousou the best on January 23, 2012:
for me I think the animal it is noT important
Robert P (author) from Canada on January 13, 2012:
The fact that scientists are now able to clone dead pets shows that we are getting closer to being able to bringing extinct animals back. But keep in mind that it is easier to clone a dead dog than a dead dinosaur because 1) the DNA of the dead dog is in better condition. We do not have samples of perfect dinosaur DNA, though we may be able to get mammoth DNA and 2) we still have living female dogs that can carry the cloned fetus. But with dinosaurs we have the problem of who or what will give birth to the clone.
Kelton on January 12, 2012:
I want a dodo bird for a pet....
vahid on January 12, 2012:
I think we should be aware of ethical issues............
lexi on January 12, 2012:
well, i don't think they should clone dinosaurs back to life but i was watching a show last night on TLC and these people cloned their pets. these dog were born again like before they died, it was awesome! some scientist in Korea found how to do it but it costs 50 thousand dollars!
Thinkaboutthis on January 05, 2012:
Im going to reach back to something mentioned in Jurassic Park, because it serves as a warning of sorts:
..I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but look...dinosaurs and man. Two species separated by 65 million years of evolution, suddenly thrown back into the mix together. How can we possibly have the slightest idea what to expect?
ll cool k on December 30, 2011:
i think yhey should bring back manmoths sabertooth tiger
Marry Espitia on December 12, 2011:
i say that it would be cool to be cloning extinct animals there for we can realy learn more about them
Yar Mum on November 26, 2011:
I think humanity should clone the species WE extincted, the Barbary Lion, the Thylacine, the Dodo, the European Lion, all those species would still be roaming this beautiful world if WE hadn't hunted them down or stripped them off their lands.
Nature is wise, and nature knew it was the time for some species to depart and make space for others.
Unfortunately Humanity knows little of when it's the appropriate time for a species to extinct or not, it shouldn't be on Human hands, it should remain ONLY in nature's
So my meaning is this, bringing back the species that Humanity has wiped out, and let die the ones that nature decided to leave.
If any, Humanity is the only species whose extinction would do no harm to the world, quite the contrary, in my opinion.
mick on November 12, 2011:
let sleeping dogs sleep
Anonymous on November 09, 2011:
I say it could be really exciting to see a real life dinosaur or a wooly mammoth. You should start by attempting to clone herbivores so that there is no threat to humans. Also you don't have to release the animals into the wild just keep them in a zoo. The worst thing you could do is clone a prehistoric carnivore and release it into the wild.
Meral on October 20, 2011:
I really think we should consider the fact that humans are over-populating at a very fast pace, and we might not have room for the species we have soon enough. Bringing more back might be pointless if we are just killing off what we have, and eventually the cloned animals as well if we were to create them. I think we need to take a look at our own species and the danger we present to the world rather the cloned creatures. I'm sure we are by far the worst species the planet has ever held because of all the terrible things we do to it. Just saying.
no it would be bad because there could be a sickness it causes imagine a rabid trex on October 19, 2011:
rex athon read my naame
kieran taylor on October 19, 2011:
who wuldnt want to go to see real life dinosaurs! it'll be amazing, what an experience really. If we have the technology to do so why not, its been done with a sheep! take it the next step with a massive dinosaur! wooooooo!
MooCow on October 17, 2011:
It would be great if they could this to animals that man has made extinct like the mamoth or the tasmanian tiger but if we where to clone and bring back a dinosaur we should only bring back the herbivores or if we where to bring back a T-rex for an example they should be kept away from today's species and there should specific parts where only dinosours should be the sahara desert wouldntt be bad if we could make it rain there fertilize and make rivers and also what we do with when the giants such as mamoths migrate through russia and what if they started destroying farmers crops if we could maintain all of this then its a great idea.
jorge on October 10, 2011:
Robert on October 09, 2011:
If we brought extinct animals to life 2 things could happen
1. People wouldn't care for saving our endangered species since they know "Oh we can just clone it and bring it back"
2. If they went extinct for natural reasons, then it most likely won't survive now, like the dinosaurs, most of their food went extinct with them, or a mammoth would over heat and could go anywhere at the poles for the animal that already live there. Would you like it the brought some person or animal and they told you to move to live somewhere else for this person or a zoo for the animal? If it went extinct from human causes, then some people wouldn't hold back on hunting or anything since they can back.
M on October 07, 2011:
I think it would be great for this to happen - I am aspiring to be a scientist and do this when I'm older. But what if they carried diseases that could wipe out the human race? Aa!
cookie512 on October 06, 2011:
great! please check out my blogs, and comment! and follow!
Jesse V. on October 03, 2011:
So...I believe in a young earth and an intelligent creator as in God and his son Jesus Christ died for our sins. The earth is only 6000 years old and there has been tissue in the process of decomposition of a dinosaur. We don't need to get caught up in playing God but by seeing how great these animals used to be and how much greater God must be to have created them. Its not a matter of if man kind can "create life" of a dinosaur but if God will allow us to. Looks like its been mostly a failure for you "scientists" to do it anyways.
TROY on September 09, 2011:
I THINK ITS THE BEST IDEA THAT'S EVER BEEN SINCE THE IDEA OF PIZZA AND ICE CREAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ITS WOULD BE FREKIN AMAZING AND THE COOLEST THING EVER
No Name on September 06, 2011:
If extinct animals were brought back to life, there would be so many different factors that would occur, so many different laws, so many different diseases and such a much different planet.
Would they change any ecosystems?
The answer is yes, ecosystems would change, for a number of reasons, the first reason is other parts of that ecosystem might not adapt to the animal the way it should. For example if a brand knew car was meant to have diesel in it, and you put petrol in it, things could get a bit haywire. This is no different to an extinct animal that is habituating back into its nature. Also, most of these creatures were extinct millions of years ago, some other the animals that are alive now have never came in contact with them, this might weird them break up the habitats therefore dimensioning there ecosystem.
Many would find themselves in a drastically altered environment to the habitats they once occupied, and without too many animals of the same species around, in fact they would be socially outcast in a world that no longer makes sense to them.
We have no idea how these organisms would affect other species. But at the same time we have to take into account that some of these species became extinct due to actions by humans such as the destruction of their environment or over-hunting. Perhaps bringing them back through human intervention would only undo the damage that we caused.
This is one reason why bringing back extinct animals by genetic engineering is a bad idea.
No name on September 03, 2011:
From what I have read the main reason people wanting to clone animals is either 1. for their own amusement or 2. because they are feeling guilty at causing the animal to be extinct. Are they really the best of reasons? It really sounds more like a self ambition to satisfy the human conscious and feelings. I believe people should think more about the cost of this venture relative to other more important needs, like providing enough water for our growing population and preventing endangered animals from becoming extinct.
IF cloning was to be done, the animal will NEVER be the same as the species, it will always contain a small amount of the host's DNA, in this sense you won't be bringing an extinct species back, instead only making a very similar copy of it. This will never makeup for how humans have effected the environment, it will only help with our guilt.
If all this think about the cloned animal! Dolly the sheep died at an early age after many complications. It sounded like she had a pretty painful life. If we did bring species back will their lives be much the same?
funguy on August 28, 2011:
Thanks for the info!
Robert P (author) from Canada on August 27, 2011:
jack, It is difficult to know what would be the result of cloning extinct animals because we have no experience with it. However, we may be able to get an idea by looking at what happened it Australia when rabbits and other animals were introduced by the settlers. Lacking any natural predators, the rabbits and other animals multiplied quickly and came to threaten the natural species.
This might happen in the case of cloned animals if they were the kind that were able to reproduce quickly and lacked natural predators. So for example, cloning some type of prehistoric rat would likely be a very bad idea. However, I do not believe that cloning a large dinosaur would carry the same risk. Larger animals need a lot of food so they tend to have a lower birth rate. Despite what Jurassic Park suggested, I find it difficult to believe that you could have thousands of dinosaurs roaming loose in a short period of time. Plus large animals like dinosaurs or mammoths are easy to find and if you had to, because you they were causing problems, they could be shot in order to bring their numbers down.
clone No. 85673 on August 26, 2011:
WOW! i completely agree with you jack. clones just aren't the answer ^.^
Jack on August 26, 2011:
I believe that cloning animals should not be allowed. think of the consequences that cloned animals will bring. diseases and viruses will spread everywhere due to their poor immune system, the animals will have defects in its genes because of their gene imperfections and they will ruin the natural habitat that they find themselves in if they where not supposed to be there in the first place. if we reintroduce extinct animals then the damage that will follow will be unimaginable.
Once we start to clone animals and release them into the wild, what comes next? will we farm and produce cloned animals for food? will there be, over time, nothing but cloned animals left? will it eventually lead to the cloning of humans? there are just too many questions and too many possible disasters that may occur from cloning, and that is why the chain should not be started.
Nature did not intend for us to change what it has created, so lets not change what nature has given us.
Robert P (author) from Canada on August 20, 2011:
@Anthony - I agree with you up to a point but sometimes well intentioned efforts result in more damage to the environment and more species becoming extinct. Look at what happened in Australia. The British settlers imported some rabbits and they multiplied so much that they threatened the sheep industry and drove other species close to extinction. So the settlers brought in foxes, but these too became so numerous that they are considered a pest, driving other animals to the brink.
Perhaps if we bring back an old species they will multiply quickly because they have no natural predators and then this will upset the existing balance of nature.
Anthony on August 20, 2011:
Humans have the power to protect all species and up to now have done a horrible job. We were given the greatest gift over all aniamls which is knowledge. That knowledge also comes with the greatest responsibilty to protect all. Many species have gone extict because people thought they looked great on their wall or that they caused a threat to the money they could make from farming. Humans were put on this earth to co-exist w animals not wipe them out. As the human popullation continues to explode the global extinction of all species is inevitable. The need for resources and habitat will take precedent over all. If we have the knowledge and means to bring back species then its our time to make right all the wrongs we have done to all species
y on August 11, 2011:
I would not agree for the extinct to come bak to life........ it is against the nature...... let things be the way they are......... there is time for everything in life..... god can create anything he wants n destroy anything he wants, there is a reason to everything in life.....