Woolly Mammoth Cloned ?

paulonious said:

Man had zero to do with its extinction...

It's debated that man had everything to do with its extinction. The animal went through a sudden and severe population decline around the same time humans started inhabiting their environment.

paulonious said:

Cloning is just wrong in my eyes. First off, nature ran its course on this particular mammal. Man had zero to do with its extinction. Second, cloning it for the purposes of research, also known as torture? Evil.

I'm not sure that occasional blood draws and tissue samples is equal to torture.

paulonious said:

rgambs said:

paulonious said:

Cloning is just wrong in my eyes. First off, nature ran its course on this particular mammal. Man had zero to do with its extinction. Second, cloning it for the purposes of research, also known as torture? Evil.

I'm not sure that occasional blood draws and tissue samples is equal to torture.

Imprisonment from birth to death is, in my opinion.

I don't fully agree or disagree. Being the only mammoth around would be pretty shitty but a nice stable environment free from predators and with ample, regular food is something short of torture to me. It depends on the psychology of the animal, captivity sucks but some fare well enough, while with other species it is akin to torture.

And even if an animal felt perfectly fine in captivity, I still think cloning of anything is fucking with the natural order of things and unethical.

paulonious said:

Any living creature that by nature roams the earth, in my opinion, would feel tortured not being able to do so.,

Do you feel tortured by the "civilized" way of life that you lead? Do you roam the Earth? It isn't necessarily so black and white as all that! We fuck with the natural order of things all the time. Every aspect of our lives is tied to the extraction, manipulation, and burning of carbon deposits that were buried naturally and unearthed unnaturally. We are chemically altering the atmosphere of our planet. Inoculation, artificial selection, robotics, alternate fertilization techniques...etc... Cloning just gets a bad reputation because it sounds so foreign and is the stuff of sci-fi legends, when we do crazier stuff regularly.

We have evolved over thousands of years into our so-called self-imposed "civilized captivity". Mammoths have not. I know we fuck with nature all the time. Do I agree with those just because that's how things are? Nope. DonI live within that system and thrive as part of it? Yes, I do. But I wasn't thrust into it unnaturally. It has been part of our nature for a long time.

The reason cloning gets a bad rap is because everyone knows the true motivation behind it: human entertainment and/or research and/or superego. There is absolutely no point to it. If someone were to tell me that they wanted to clone a (insert animal here) solely for pure reasons, with little to no negative impact on current eco-systems, I would be all for it. But that is nit the case here. Humans are egotistical assholes who think just because they can, they should.

paulonious said:

We have evolved over thousands of years into our so-called self-imposed "civilized captivity". Mammoths have not. I know we fuck with nature all the time. Do I agree with those just because that's how things are? Nope. DonI live within that system and thrive as part of it? Yes, I do. But I wasn't thrust into it unnaturally. It has been part of our nature for a long time.

The reason cloning gets a bad rap is because everyone knows the true motivation behind it: human entertainment and/or research and/or superego. There is absolutely no point to it. If someone were to tell me that they wanted to clone a (insert animal here) solely for pure reasons, with little to no negative impact on current eco-systems, I would be all for it. But that is nit the case here. Humans are egotistical assholes who think just because they can, they should.

Godfather. said:

paulonious said:

We have evolved over thousands of years into our so-called self-imposed "civilized captivity". Mammoths have not. I know we fuck with nature all the time. Do I agree with those just because that's how things are? Nope. DonI live within that system and thrive as part of it? Yes, I do. But I wasn't thrust into it unnaturally. It has been part of our nature for a long time.

The reason cloning gets a bad rap is because everyone knows the true motivation behind it: human entertainment and/or research and/or superego. There is absolutely no point to it. If someone were to tell me that they wanted to clone a (insert animal here) solely for pure reasons, with little to no negative impact on current eco-systems, I would be all for it. But that is nit the case here. Humans are egotistical assholes who think just because they can, they should.

I think it's wrong just because....but might they clone this animal to study it so that they may gain more understanding of this planets past in order preserve our future ? or some other legit reason ?

Godfather.

absolutely!! Woolly Mams had a special blood adaptation that allowed them to endure extremely low temperatures. Studying the genetics of this adaptation could lead to a wealth of knowledge about who knows what. Science is fun, sometimes you go looking for A and you can't find it but you stumble across B which leads you to C and soon you have a whole alphabet of knowledge you didn't even expect to find. Cryogenics alone would make it worth studying in my opinion. It isn't just "playing god" it is probing the corners of the universe in an all-encompassing quest for knowledge!

paulonious said:

Cloning is just wrong in my eyes. First off, nature ran its course on this particular mammal. Man had zero to do with its extinction. Second, cloning it for the purposes of research, also known as torture? Evil.

We are very much part of evolution as well as how we affect this planet.

It may need to be kept isolated from other pachyderms, but I doubt it would encounter a biome so severely foreign that it would need the bubble boy treatment. I could be wrong, I am not an evolutionary biologist, but 10,000 years seems a relatively short period, even for quickly evolving organisms like bacteria and viruses.