De Extinction Is The Recreation Of Species That Have Gone Extinct

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

In 1993, Steven Spielburg’s Jurassic Park introduced the concept of bringing extinct species back. In 2003, a team of Spanish and French scientists took Spielburg’s movie to the next level—they successfully brought back the Pyrenean ibex, a species of wild goat (93). With increasing rates of extinction, the scientific community is debating whether or not this process of de-extinction should continue to be pursued. Although it would be remarkable to visit an exhibit featuring a saber-tooth tiger or woolly mammoth, these animals went extinct for a reason; humans should not bring back extinct animals, but instead use the funding for more practical purposes.

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.

Conservation of our biodiversity not only demonstrates foresight, it protects the natural resources so vital to our own continued existence. The value of any single species to an ecosystem is immeasurable; the environment will not endure without its species, despite size or niche. These animals are not dispensable. And, they are apt to face extinction in the not too distant future, unless a resolve for their preservation is insisted by the public and enforced by governments internationally.

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.

Initially, like some teenagers in my class, the interest in genetic engineering was nothing more than a fad. My classmates would chatter for a few moments about the subject of de-extinction. But, the topic disappeared into the background, replaced by pure middle school gossip. However, there was something about the concept of de-extinction that intrigued me. And, as the notion sunk in, the ideas began to flourish.How did they bring the animal back? Could we bring back other animals? Would they be different from their older counterparts? As my internal monolog of questions grew, I sought my mother for help. When asked, she stated one word,”Write.” With a smile on her face, she knew that I had begun to discover an interest. With my mother’s advice

According to another article called “5 Reasons To Bring Back Extinct Animals (And 5 Reasons Not To)” by Breanna Draxler, “De-extinction could be a big step forward for genetic engineering.” This means that if scientist can modify DNA to bring back extinct animals, it can help them achieve more with this great accomplishments. Furthermore, according to “Should We Bring Extinct Species Back From The Dead?” by David Shultz, “For decades the notion of “de-extinction” hovered on the scientific fringes, with new advances in genetic engineering.” To explain, when scientist were trying to find out how to bring extinct animals back to life, they discovered new things in genetic engineering that got them one step closer to actually modifying DNA and bringing back extinct animals. So the scientist were being very clever for trying. In addition, according to David Shultz, “researchers believe that it’s time to start thinking seriously about which animals we might be able to bring back, and which ones would do the most good for the ecosystems they left behind.” To explain, it shows here that scientist are being clever by thinking about which animals they should bring back and which ones they shouldn’t. Because they do need some of the animals to come back to life and help out the ecosystems. But others dont need to come back or shouldn’t come back because they could be a waste of time to the scientist or they could just be very

Ronald Sandler, a Philosopher, wrote an essay called “The Ethics of Reviving Long Extinct Species”. It is now possible to revive extinct animals but is it ethical, that’s the question. People that are for it say it brings value and justice. Those against it say it is unnatural and playing god. There are not strong ethical cases for either side.

Through this lecture, I observed many things including the way we as humans have a need to rescue things and learn about the past. We as humans seem to instinctively want answers to things concerning the past of our world. The fact that we have trouble with things such as this is perplexing. A thing such as so simple as letting nature take course and letting animals die out is something we can’t do for some reason. Who would of thought that there were so many people out there that were so emotional when it came to protecting wild life and its current statues. For some reason humans crave to be a savior to this animal we won’t let die off. Perhaps we do this because in a sense we want to feel like we can make a large enough difference in our ecosystem we can leave our mark on this cruel world. It’s peculiar because you don’t see other animals helping each other so as that that certain species doesn’t go extinct. Just like in Ms.Cunningham lecture when she was talking about the “Extinct Diving Goose” and how it was a

Evans discusses the ethical issues cloning extinct species and in addition show may examples of extinct species or soon to be extinct that are in the process of research. This scholarly article relates to most of my sources because it discusses the issues within each species that some of my other resources talk about. Relating sources with further my understanding of the cloning extinct species topic.

Aldo Leopold articulates about an important statement regarding environmental conservation: “A little repentance just before a species goes over the brink (i.e. becomes extinct) is enough to make us virtuous. When the species is gone we have a good cry and repeat the performance” (Leopold, 194). In this statement, Leopold is referring to how we do not realize the importance of a particular species until it is extinct or on the brink of extinction, and the worst part is that we keep repeating this same mistake yet again.

De-extinction is a process where a previously extinct species or a species with a major endangerment problem is brought back to the world. At the moment, scientists are working to bring back the passenger pigeon, which was a common species a century ago. While some say believe extinct animals should stay extinct, others believe de-extinction should be done. One species called the bucardo, a type of goat, was brought back to life for seven minutes, which has been a promising sign for those working to bring other species back, as it showed that de-extinction can be done, therefore gene editing can be a positive when it comes to de-extinction.

Scientists estimate that 150-200 living species become extinct every 24 hours. The average human might not consider the significance of these dying species, but that may prove to be an issue in the near future. Living species, as Environmental Specialist Michael Marshall, states, provide “ecosystem services”. Some of these services are obvious, such as the meat that humans consume or the oxygen used to breathe. Imagine the world without any meat, and the widespread food shortages that would result. This fiction could become a reality if actions are not taken to prevent extinction. Because of the threats to resources that are required to sustain ourselves as humans, we must take steps towards conservation of species who are approaching extinction.