An extinct cave lion, at least 10,000 years old

Post by hugh4 » Wed, Oct 28, 2015, 7:44 PM UTC

Mz wrote: post #7

guard-of-terra wrote: post #2

Hopefully we can still revive those along with mammoths.

This may not be realistic, without even considering the angle of "can we solve the challenges involved in recreating species from some DNA samples?" The earth has changed in ways that can make prior organisms simply unsuited to life on earth, similar to how fish are not suited to surviving out of water. Gill fish simply cannot breathe out of water, even aside from mobility issues. So, as one example, the earth has su…

Post by guard-of-terra » Wed, Oct 28, 2015, 8:02 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #6

alsetmusic wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never been comfortable with the concept of reintroducing a species that we haven't directly observed. We can't predict the impact one may have on its environment or disruption to the food chain. Reintroducing a species which we are familiar with, say after over hunting by poachers, is more likely to produce the expected results without complications because we have prior knowledge of that species role in natur…

Remember, these are the creatures that lost. They were out-competed in their day. Also, their genes are likely still present today in some cousin species.

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Oct 28, 2015, 8:13 PM UTC

hugh4 wrote: post #11

Mz wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may not be realistic, without even considering the angle of "can we solve the challenges involved in recreating species from some DNA samples?" The earth has changed in ways that can make prior organisms simply unsuited to life on earth, similar to how fish are not suited to surviving out of water. Gill fish simply cannot breathe out of water, even aside from mobility issues. So, as one example, the earth has su…

This was only ten thousand years ago, though. Anything that lived millions of years ago we're very unlikely to find enough intact genetic material to string a genome together anyway. You would of course need some kind of zoo, reintroducing a new apex predator into the wild would probably wind up bad for somebody.

Post by voidlogic » Wed, Oct 28, 2015, 8:55 PM UTC

cwp wrote: post #12

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Natural processes can include earthquakes, volcanoes, viruses. Its often random. Plenty of reason to think these species have something to offer in the present day. I think of it like publishing an old book, or seeing an old movie. It is being a good steward of a legacy in a sense.

Also, there are a lot of species that went extinct because they encountered a predator they couldn't deal with - people. Is that a "natural process" just because it happened before recorded history?

Post by pvaldes » Wed, Oct 28, 2015, 9:18 PM UTC

RankingMember wrote: post #8

alsetmusic wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never been comfortable with the concept of reintroducing a species that we haven't directly observed. We can't predict the impact one may have on its environment or disruption to the food chain. Reintroducing a species which we are familiar with, say after over hunting by poachers, is more likely to produce the expected results without complications because we have prior knowledge of that species role in natur…

There's something perverse about the idea of reanimating a species essentially for our own enjoyment (edification, whatever you want to call it) after it died out through natural processes.