De-Extinction Cloning

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.

Today, our society is changing so fast that we barely even notice it’s happening. Soon enough, our society will be able to do what the scientists in Jurassic Park did, and create copies of our “once exist” giants. But while science and technology evolves, we should be the ones to bring up the question not “if we can,’ but rather, “should we?” Dinosaurs are ravenous and dangerous creatures that could tear us apart into pieces, but if properly contained, could be a magnificent sight for many to view. Nature removed the dinosaurs from our planet by selection, but we can use our superior intelligence to play god through biological manipulation. In an article by Thomas Sumner and Bjorn Carey, they discuss the ethics of reviving dead species such as the ones in Jurassic Park, and denote that the technology is in our near future. “Twenty years after the release of Jurassic Park, the dream of bringing back the dinosaurs remains science fiction. But scientists predict that within 15 years they will be able to revive some more recently extinct species, such as the dodo or the passenger pigeon, raising the question of whether or not they should – just because they can” (Sumner and Carey).

Imagine it’s 30 years in the future, you and your little grandchildren are going to the zoo to see the new and improved Wooly Mammoth. Except it’s not improved, it’s not even a purebred Wooly Mammoth, and its stuck in a cage. Scientist are trying to decide if they should resurrect the Wooly Mammoth, by breeding its embryo with an Asian Elephant. The Wooly Mammoth shouldn't be resurrected because, there is no habitat for them, costs, and is it even logically possible.

Care Should Be Taken in Cloning The movie Jurassic Park has given a hint on the disastrous effects of cloning, for cloned animals might result in the extinction of human beings. Therefore, some people argue that though science has the ability to clone animals and plants, it does not mean it should be and scientists need to take care of cloning. I agree with the argument, for the prevalence of cloning might lead to another Jurassic Park tragedy. More specifically, the prevalence of cloning should not be advocated because of the exploitation of animals, uncertainty of science and technology as well as the loss of gene diversity.

I think that once there is a successful procedure done there will initially be a very small market for human

This shows that cloning can help bring back and restore populations of animals that are in extinct or in danger of extinction..

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.

The thought of bringing back animals from the past has been a fascination of scientists, writers, and filmmakers for many years. With some recent breakthroughs in cloning this may be possible, specifically with mammoths. While it may be possible, the question of the ethics and logistics around it must be raised. The benefits of this recreating a mammoth are more superficial in my opinion, but they are still relevant. The data we could take from observing an animal that has not existed for thousands of years, or the closest thing we will ever come to it. From this data we could make better inferences about the ecology and evolution of mammoths. There would also be an enormous economic benefit to the country who would host this species, which

An endangered species that goes extinct eventually ends up affecting all the animals in their habitat. If an animal that various other animals depend on goes extinct other animals could also go into extinction since they most likely will not be able to adapt quickly to finding new prey leading to starvation. Animals could also face the problem of having to immigrate to a new environment for food leading to their extinction because they were unable to adapt quickly to the new habitat. Through the clone technology scientists hope they will soon be able to save more species saying “we will perfect the technology to clone animals, and thus we could forever preserve endangered species” (Document A). The argument of saving endangered species is invalid because it is rare that a clone embryo will survive and if only few animals of a kind are left they will be forced to keep inserting embryos into a surrogate mother that could potentially kill the mothers too. If their bodies cannot handle carrying another organism or if having surgery a lot to insert the embryo the new mothers can now also die leaving the species without anyone to carry their children. While trying to save a species they run the risk of completely killing it off in a shorter amount of time than they expected. Even if the embryo lives up to the birthing moment the probability of the clone surviving is so little that they would be spending money to create more of a species that would return right back to being endangered in a short period of

Cloning can occur naturally, but this mainly happens with bacteria. Bacteria does this thing that is called asexual reproduction and causes it to reproduce the exact same copy as before. “When they clone an animal, first they take skin cells from the animal to be cloned. Then, they take an unfertilized egg from the adult female of the same species and remove the nucleus of the egg which contains the other half of the DNA, leaving the mothers egg empty. After that they put the clone’s DNA into the female’s egg and that is how fertilization begins.” (Ades Jane)

In my view, bringing extinct species back to life only makes sense with animals that were extinct in the last years, days or hours because these animals played a role in the current ecosystem. The loss of those animals can cause a disequilibrium in the world, thier return can be useful. In contrast, animals that died hundreds or thousands of years ago don’t matters anymore. The cloning of such animals wouldn’t make sense, because you couldn’t free them without disbalancing the ecosystem. The only reason could be to improve the cloning techniques but what should scientists do after they cloned them? Put them in a

My opinion about this issue is that cloning could be beneficial for environment and nature, but instead of cloning extinct animals, scientists should take care of endangered animals in order to safe them, and keep them alive before they

If we are able to bring back an animal from extinction it would be a breakthrough in the field of genetic engineering and we can see how these animals died off and try to prevent that to happen to similar species.If

Cloning is a vital technology that humanity should strive to perfect, despite the many obstacles it currently faces in development and application. Approximately 100 species become extinct a day. Among them are flora and fauna that could hold the cures for cancer, HIV, or any other disease. Cloning technology could preserve and restore these vitally important animals. As of now, the technology is far from usable. Most experiments have resulted in the death of the cloned embryo. However, a few have yielded incredible results. Sheep, mice, and dogs have been successfully cloned and are the first steps towards a huge advancement in biology. However, the advent of cloning is not without opposition. Many believe that the cloning of animals is unethical and of humans taboo. (Hartl) The protesting of stem cell research has already caused enough problems for researchers, and they expect many more when cloning becomes commonplace.

Cloning is an amazing complex thing! In this paper a person will learn some basic cloning information, the history of cloning, good and bad things about cloning, human cloning, and bringing back endangered species with the use of cloning. Information includes the processes and some animals that have been cloned. The history includes the different cloning achievements starting with the first artificial twin. The good and bad parts will of course talk about the pros and cons of cloning. Human cloning tells what is the use of it and how people feel about it. The last part talks about the possibility of using cloning to protect endangered species, and if it would be enough to help the population. If cloning is used right it could change the world. It could help people to determine ways of curing diseases and viruses. It could help farmers produce stronger and leaner cattle. Many people in todays society have heard of cloning and think of putting something in one machine and another one comes out the other machine, but that’s not even close to how it actually works. A better story would be Dolly the sheep. Dolly was the first mammal made through the process of somatic nuclear transfer, and was cloned from an adult sheep udder cell (The History Of Cloning). Cloning is one thing that is rarely talked about on the news, but could be used in so many ways to change the world as we know it.