Animal Extinction Research Paper

John Wiens, an evolutionary biologist at Stony Brook University in New York says, “There is a terrible urgency to saving threatened species and habitats.” He continues in saying “As far as I can see, there is little urgency for bringing back extinct ones. Why invest millions of dollars in bring a handful of species back from the dead, when there are millions still waiting to be discovered, described, and protected?” This is a problem for many scientists and Paul R. Ehrlich states in his article, The Case of De- Extinction:It is a Fascinating but Dumb Idea, says that “It is much more sensible to put all the limited resources for science and conservation into preventing extinctions, by tackling the causes of demise….” This is proving that de-extinction is a bad idea because of the facts that it is more important to put money and research into conservation efforts. By focusing on de-extinction. We are tearing away our focus on these efforts and putting it into something that may or may not work. Something never tested that could possibly hurt not help the environment. Paul R Ehrlich also states that “De-extinction seems far- fetched, financially problematic, and extremely unlikely to succeed.” With de- extinction hindering conservation efforts and being unlikely to succeed it is clear that we should not even attempt de-extinction. However hindering conservation efforts is only one way that de-extinction is a bad

Imagine a world with a flourish environment, with animals you would never dream to see. Imagine a world where we could bring back extinct animals. Some people believe that bringing back animals is unethical. But these animals can do so much for us. We should bring back extinct animals because it can help the ecosystem and some of the animals extinction was our fault.

back extinct animals is very controversial but we need to bring them back to restore ecosystems

Recently, DNA testing has been employed to create a genetic database of endangered animal species. Using this information, scientists have even cloned animals.

We should clone endangered and extinct animals because they can help cure diseases that we don’t know how to do today or that we don't have the ability to do today. It is a good idea to clone animals because

Everything in life happens for a reason, and this includes the extinction of species with and without human involvement. To reverse the process of de-extinction as some people put it “amounts to playing God” (96). Although the science behind bringing a species back is admittedly amazing, there are other ways the time and money could be spent. Spending money on animals that are on the brink of extinction, and developing techniques for successfully growing their population, are much more viable options. Frankly, de-extinction, although very remarkable, is not something that should be heavily pursued. Apart from observing a woolly mammoth lounge around behind a thick pane of glass, there is very little reason to use de-extinction to revive one. Our efforts should be turned to the millions of species that currently inhabit the earth, known and

In nature, there are cases where species go extinct due to humans or for uncontrollable reasons. Recent scientific development has allowed a new idea called de-extinction the act of cloning extinct species using DNA samples from the past and biotechnology. However, extinct species should not be brought back to existence as the idea of de-extinction diverts attention and funding from protecting many endangered species that can still thrive in their environment. Another issue that arises with de-extinction is that resurrected species could become pests in their new environment.

Over the past decades, scientists have developed numerous approach to de-extinct species through back breeding, cloning and genetic engineering. Bringing back extinct species has advantages for both humans and animals. The de-extinction of species such as woolly mammoth and saber tooth tigers would not only advanced scientific knowledge but also have environmental benefit such as restoring environment that are damaged or threatened with the help of certain now-extinct species. But the consequences to bringing extinct species back greatly outweighs the positive. While Victor Frankenstein pursuit for knowledge in itself is justified, playing with the boundaries between life and death is something that should not have tempered with. Extinct species could carry diseases that could potentially wipe humanity from the face of the planet or result in other unforeseen consequences. The de-extinction of species should not be tolerated in order to avoid consequences that could endanger the lives of humanity as well surrounding species.

De-extinction offers the possibility for extinct species to be brought back to life by reproductive cloning. Critics argue that de-extinction will reduce the will of society to protect endangered species, as well as harm the existing ecosystem upon species’ reintroduction. However, supporters argue that many species would be great candidates for de-extinction and will possibly be beneficial to the ecosystem. I will argue that de-extinction should not be pursued. I will argue that reintroduction of unextinct species could cause humanity to become disinterested in protecting endangered species due to the loss of finality of extinction. Furthermore, re-introduction of extinct species into ecosystems would negatively shift the balance, and may cause endangerment and potential extinction of otherwise unharmed populations.

Is De extinction worth pursuing? De-extinction is the process of combining incomplete genomes into one complete gene. Once that process is over, scientists will put that gene into an empty embryo to then give birth. This process could be used to bring back many extinct animals that could be very useful. De-extinction should be pursued because of its enviromental and technological benefits.

The concept of bringing a species back to life after it has gone extinct has been around for years. The idea that dinosaurs will roam the earth again has fascinated mankind since the first dinosaur fossils were first put together. Pop culture has even glorified this idea in a variety of books and movies made about the topic, such as the famous Jurassic Park trilogy. In science fiction, there are many ideas people have about brining the extinct back to life. Some of these theories have a grain of truth to it, but today, the idea of bringing back a species is no longer science fiction, but will likely be possible in the near future. This process is called De-Extinction. The most recent developments in genetic extraction,

In this article, the major conflict discussed is whether scientists should pursue de-extinction in the years to come. De-extinction, also referred to as resurrection biology, is the process of creating an organism that either resembles or is a member of an extinct species. Scientists are fascinated by this field, but it sparks a major conflict with the ethical implications. I found this article extremely interesting because before reading this, I had never heard about this debate. I knew that technology is constantly growing and improving, but I didn’t know scientists were even considering this. When this debate was first introduced in the article, I thought it was fascinating and that scientists should definitely pursue this. What I did not think about however, are the questions one has to consider when delving into de-extinction- Where is the money coming from? Our country alone is in tremendous debt already. How much time will all this take? And the overall question is: Is all the time and money worth it? Would our species,

According to Stanford Researchers there are five key benefits that would arise from de-extinction. This includes scientific knowledge, technological advancement, environmental benefits, justice, and wonder. Scientific knowledge refers to the fact that de-extinction could offer insight into the evolution of species. Technological advancement would occur meaning it would be a huge step forward for genetic engineering. The environmental benefits include the facts that de-extinction could restore and fix threatened or damaged ecosystems. Many people also fell that we owe these animals justice since humans are the reason a vast majority of these animals have gone extinct in the first place. Finally, many would wonder what it would be like to see a species that was previously extinct (Discover

Technology is the sole reason cloning is even possible, but it is not enough to save endangered species on its own. Due to technology, extinct species may even possible be brought back into existence. A closely related species, currently living, that could serve as a surrogate mother and a well-preserved source of DNA from the extinct

There have been five well known extinctions on this earth. The one most well known is the mass extinction that ended the dinosaurs. Mass extinction is often described as the elimination of a large number of species in a short period of time. Despite what many think, the elimination of species is almost commonplace at this point. The Earth is currently in the middle of a sixth mass extinction, and it’s been caused by the human race.