Scientists Want to Bring Some Animals Back from Extinction

seedscanada · Post by **seedscanada** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:11 am

Saw this and found it interesting. So did my 7 year old son..
Did you know there really was an "elephant bird"?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/scientist ... 02151.html
The list of candidates:

http://longnow.org/revive/candidates/

And deeper in the article list by their source was the possibility of resurrecting the Easter Island Palm, which:
" was known formerly as Jubaea disperta, and was the native cocoid palm species of Easter Island. It disappeared from the pollen record circa 1650 CE.... Partly to avoid giving credence to the common but speculative assumption that the palms were Jubaea chilensis and used as rollers to move the moai statues of Easter Island, John Dransfield assigned the species to a new genus."
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschalococos

canadianplant · Post by **canadianplant** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:38 am

This has been popping up a lot lately.

I can understand bringing back species that we killed. For instance, the passenger pidgeon, which was a very improtant species in the NA forests. There would be flocks 500 miles wide or more. Can you imagine the amount of crap/fertilizer that would mean over a wide spread area?

The problem I see is resurrecting animals that "naturally" went extinct (its in " because in theory us wiping animals out is natural, I meant natural extinction events rather then us). Russia is trying to bring back mammoths. And seeing as a good portion of the NA forests were dependent on the ice age mega fauna, in theory it could be "good". There are just way to many variables and unknowns right now.

hardyjim · Post by **hardyjim** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:00 am

What strikes me as a little odd about this is....we can't even protect the species we
have now and they want to try and bring some back?

canadianplant · Post by **canadianplant** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:55 am

hardyjim wrote:What strikes me as a little odd about this is....we can't even protect the species we
have now and they want to try and bring some back?

Yeah, one of the arguments ive heard is that being able to bring them back will makes us not give a damn about conservation and the like.

hardyjim · Post by **hardyjim** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:21 am

canadianplant wrote:
hardyjim wrote:What strikes me as a little odd about this is....we can't even protect the species we
have now and they want to try and bring some back?
Yeah, one of the arguments ive heard is that being able to bring them back will makes us not give a damn about conservation and the like.

Lets start building a new house before we put out the fire that burnt the old one down

Paul Ont · Post by **Paul Ont** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:54 am

Just so you know, this is not yet possible. It may be soon, but it is not possible to do so yet!

One imagines that funding would be better for these more spectacular 'Resurrection' projects than for plain old conservation or discovery (taxonomic analyses) projects. It's easier to get the funding if you have something spectacular to sell.

lucky1 · Post by **lucky1** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:08 pm

being able to bring them back will makes us not give a damn about conservation and the like.

Agree.
The ever present ethical question: just because we can (soon), should we?

Barb

hardyjim · Post by **hardyjim** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:11 am

We should bring back the Lucky1

Paul Ont · Post by **Paul Ont** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 7:19 am

Ya, what ever happened to Barb?