Essay On Smilodon

Imagine a world where one extinct animal causes chaos. It eats all the plants and invades other animals territory. Animals are dropping like flies due to one extinct, no longer existing, animal being brought into the world once again this time by humans. Humans also can be the cause of extinction hunting, destroying an animal's home, pollution, and introduction of alien species are just a few ways that we can cause extinction of an animal. Extinction can also occur naturally when disease is spread, or an invasive species takes over. I believe that we should not bring back extinct creatures for three distinct reasons. De- extinction could hinder conservation efforts,de-extinction attempts have failed, and finally bringing back extinct

One important reason to bring back extinct animals is it could expand our ecosystem. A extinct frog called the Gastric Brooding Frog. This very special frog gives birth. Not only does this frog gives birth, this frog gives birth out of its mouth. And we killed it by pollution and habitat loss. In the article “Raising The Dead” by Elizabeth Kolbert says “Archer is leading the team

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

First, cloning is a bad thing because most things that undergo cloning have many medical disorders and die an early death. On https://listontap.com/10-reasons-human -cloning-bad-society-large/ they gave marvelous examples why. It took exactly 277 eggs to make a clone of Dolly. That shows how little attempt at cloning fail. Another thing is Many cloned animals have under formed hearts lungs and other organs. That just goes to show how cloning animals is not very practical for the animals only live around half the lifespan of their breed of animal. Take Dolly's clone her clone died at, 6 years old, half of what sheep of her breed live. Over all cloning is mostly unsuccessful.

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.

I think cloning a deceased pet is a terrible idea because, it seems extremely disrespectful. To me it seems like you’re replacing your pet, and if you don’t mind replacing a pet with a genetic copy the original pet must not have met that much to you. If a beloved family member died would you create a copy of them? I know I wouldn’t. How would you feel if one day you die and are immediately replaced by a genetic copy of yourself. Doesn't that take away from who you are? Every human on earth is different from each other and creating an exact replica of any living thing makes it less like a living creature and more like something that can be mass produced in a factory. Everyone is special and I think cloning takes away from that. Another reason I’m against cloning recreationally (cloning for your enjoyment not to cure diseases and sniff out bombs and such) is if you have a younger child that’s dog dies and you decide to clone it, doesn’t that take away the perpetuity of death for this child? If someone close to this child dies and they think they can just replace them than the shock of that being untrue will be much worst than their grief over a deceased dog. To conclude my complicated opinion, when something/someone is dead leave it to rest! Horror movies have taught that messing with others lives (or deaths) only ends bad for you.

Scientists in 2009 attempted to clone an extinct species of wild goat, the Pyrenean Ibex, otherwise known as the bucardo. After many attempts, one surrogate goat mother became pregnant and gave birth. Unfortunately, the babe died in just moments after birth. However this cloning took place only seven years after the cloning of dolly the sheep in 2002, the first successfully cloned mammal. Making the jump from cloning being impossible to nearly reviving a dead species just seven years later shows proof how quickly this incredible technology is advances. It has now been over a decade since the cloning of the bucardo, and the technology available now would very likely produce a healthy clone. The only question now is, should we? Some in favor of de-extinction argue for the possible medical benefits that could be learned by furthering research in this field. Most pharmaceutical drugs are not made from scratch, but instead derived from natural compounds found in wild plants, or animals. Innumerable species have gone extinct before science even had to opportunity to attempt to research them. Bringing species back gives us the unique opportunity to study these species of plants and animals to learn from

Conservations budgets are limited, assuming that the resurrection would be covered, maintaining the animals would be even more costly. A program to prevent the extinction of the Northern Rhino, will cost millions of dollars. A Wooly Mammoth would be even more because scientists know a lot of things about the Northern Rhino. Scientists are almost blind when it comes to the Wooly Mammoths. A study led by Joseph Bennett found that bringing back the Wooly Mammoth could lead to biodiversity loss rather than gain. In New Zealand, there is government funding for 11 extinct animals, and it might sacrifice triple the number of alive species. (Elena Motivans, 2017). Why would anyone want to risk the lives of our living Asian elephants when scientists don’t even know if this experiment will actually work. Spending all that money, and possibly killing another species is to big of a

Cloning is a controversial topic because new areas of science often raise questions about safety. Early experiment performed on animals showed potential dangers. For example, cloned cows developed faulty immune systems. In some studies, cloned animals seemed to grow old faster and die younger than normal members of the species. According to Encarta online

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 are also many negative aspects of cloning. To create different organs or limbs in order to help a person to live longer or more comfortably seems to go against nature. The way human life should be created is through sexual intercourse. Harmond Varmus, a schoolteacher, said it best; “Human cloning represents a grave attack on the dignity of conception and on the right an unrepeatable, unpredetermined set of genes.” To clone an animal is almost the same thing. We are playing with the way humans and animals have reproduced for years. Is it fair that we clone and then kill an animal just for its organs in order to save a person’s life? Scientists are not even sure that the animal’s organs will be compatible with the human body. According to the Medical Research

In the argument of “Should We Bring Back Extinct Species” by Joseph Bennett and Ben J. Novak it is discussed whether or not species that were once dead could be brought back to life. Scientist should not bring back extinct species.This all sounds like a real jurassic park dinosaurs could make a come back but why should scientist bring back an extinct species when we can’t even keep our still living animals alive. Joseph Bennett the assistant of biology from Carleton University states “Those who support bringing back extinct species will say that doing so will help support other species. But scientist already have important species-such as elephants tigers, and rhinos-that are in serious trouble.” If scientist were to concentrate on resurrecting