Comments on: Reinventing the Mammoth

By: Abigail Karper

Abigail Karper — Wed, 01 May 2013 11:54:59 +0000

Overall I found this article to be extremely interesting, and more than a little exciting. But something I thought was rather strange was the idea of bringing the mammoth back from extinction; after all, how can we expect the mammoth to survive in today’s world? If we can’t keep the world’s living elephants from becoming extinct, shouldn’t we be focusing our efforts on fixing that instead of attempting to resurrect a creature that has been dead for thousands of years? I found it a bit odd to suggest a plan to reintroduce mammoths when there is already so much to be done for their descendants.

By: amaiya lake

amaiya lake — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:30:03 +0000

resurecting the mammoth and othe animals is a yes in my mid. if we do we will be bringing back gods creation and note only the… a mussing peice of our earth. if we bring back extincted animals we will be bringing them back home… they were here first so why should the have to not come back. if we bring them back they can reproduce and go generation to generation. bringing them back will make up for human beings killing them making them extincted in the first place.

By: Les Wallace

Les Wallace — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:07:21 +0000

I remeber arguments form some years ago that we shouldn’t reintroduce beavers to Scotland because they had been gone for a few hundred years and you can’t turn the clock back. Well that had a conceit of its very own. Yes if animals aren’t quite original genome that’s an issue, but IF they are then absolutely no problem bringing them back – many vital components of eco systems are missing. Getting poetic about invalidity of bringing back what WE exterminated is a form of arrogance and hubris itself. The Bering sea would be better if the Steller’s sea cow could be brought back, and how dare anyone deny future generations from seeing a Great Auk if proper specimens can be ‘brought back’.

By: kenney sills

kenney sills — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:43:07 +0000

I 100% support and look forward to the possibility of restoreing the mammoth species. not only do I love all forms of paleontology, but I see scientists from other countries comeing together for amazeing discovery!..not building weapons or a better I-phone but actuall biological discovery that brings people together in the name of science.not to mention the incredible amount of information we can learn..it is my deepest hope and I pray for its success~Aloha from kauaii

By: Brian Varty

Brian Varty — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 18:51:56 +0000

I understand the argument, “just because we can, does it mean we should”? That not-withstanding, cloning extinct species presents an interesting opportunity from a marketing perspective. Think what we could do with the money generated through a mammoth viewing or photo op to save species currently endangered to the point of extinction? Does it matter if a cloned mammoth is a genetically weak second cousin to the original, when the revenue generated could make the critical difference in saving a species such as the rhino? A mammoth in a controlled (zoo-like) setting would be a powerful visual of what we stand to lose if we can’t get our collective act together to preserve what we still have. Make a mammoth,save the rhino. I’m in. Forget the foolishness about re-creating some ideological balance of nature which never did exist, and focus our energy on preserving what still does exist. Ah if it were only that simple!

By: Sharon Bigelow

Sharon Bigelow — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 02:51:12 +0000

A few million dollars would go a long way in protecting our remaining “endangered” elephants. Poaching of them is out of control and trade of Ivory should be stopped completely. Or send $$ to the Sheldrick Wildlife Trust Orphanage to help raise many orphaned babies left to die.

By: Luis Paz

Luis Paz — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:40:40 +0000

I agree the term de-extinction is a marketing effort to pass a controversial endeavour of genetic engineering. There is no ethical reason for bringing back some extinct animals to life. They will do it because they can, and doing it with some spectacular species as the mammoth, certainly attracts more funds than other less “movie like” scientific approaches. Certainly the genetic engineering techniques need to keep evolving and improving and I think this is a viable way to do it.
Restoring the world as it was (whatever we think it was) before we were able to change it in a big scale is a useless idea.

By: Vedika R.

Vedika R. — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 11:22:12 +0000

Mammoths eat = Have we thought that maybe their food plant is exist ?

By: Robert e Lee

Robert e Lee — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:44:21 +0000

Dear Brian
Conversely, the beauty of intellectuals and their constant rationalization of reality is that-in the end-they do nothing!
Good idea, I agree wholeheartedly. Thanks to NatGeo, I realized my DNA was so widespread, there was no reason for me to reproduce-that is pleasurably, consummate and then convince myself that it is necessary rather than mind-numbing ego driving me, when the world is already desperately over-populated.
In the end, whether there is a soul (now there’s food for scientific thought) to “mother nature”, or we just created that name to give us something to think about as we went about trying to manipulate it, all the research in the world has told us exactly what will happen-because it has…over and over, and over again…Our ability to change the climate, melt the bergs, destroy the forests will be meaningless. Perhaps you might wanna say “God” (?) but whomever will just start over again. Mankind is a blight, like termites in a nearly wiped out forest…our time for value has long ago come and gone. What have we learned? Well, we have some folks giving their lives to try and find truths (while nearly starving to death) as cheats and tyrants and social misfits make a meal of their peers? In 2000+ years, we can attest to the fact that carving in stone is still the best way to preserve records? Heck, with over 80% of people living within 10 miles of major water sources, we haven’t even learned to head for higher ground.
So I can rest sadly back in my computer chair as I realize the reality of bringing back anything at this point. Gosh, there isn’t even a land mass left unclaimed by mankind. We really might be able to re-build creatures via their dna, but their habit is long gone and probably owned by some land-grubbing cattle farmer by now…who’ll tell you without him, you starve…and on and on such arguments go. I suspect we will all be arguing our fate right up to that final moment-whatever it might be…oooops, that’s stereotyping…some will be underground, waiting to become permanent relics when our end comes (lol) RL

By: joseph nicholson

joseph nicholson — Sun, 24 Mar 2013 05:31:03 +0000

we shound be looking for mammoth egg and sperm cells so we coud have a proper mammoth strat away without many genarion