4 ms·

I think I agree with you that on balance it's not an obviously wise thing to do. But for fun, I tried to think of some arguments in favor of resurrecting extinc

I think I agree with you that on balance it's not an obviously wise thing to do. But for fun, I tried to think of some arguments in favor of resurrecting extinct species: - (Karma) Humans have been the proximate cause of so many extinctions, and this is a chance to "undo" some of that harm. - (Glory) Life seeks life. What could be more glorious and good than to finally apply the knowledge and art so painfully accumulated by the the hundred suffering generations before us to a real conquest of death? - (Knowledge) Merely by attempting to resurrect an extinct species, we would learn so much. And if we ever succeeded, it's likely that the things we could learn by observing extinct phenotypes and extinct phenotype-genotype mappings would make for a true revolution in the life sciences.

blisterpeanuts 11y ago
(Biology) restores some bio-diversity to the planet. (Cuisine) If passenger pigeons became commonplace again, we could eat them. Regarding your point about knowledge: totally agree. If we could coax extinct life forms back into existence, think of the likely medical implications. Regenerating limbs, repairing brain damage, curing MS and ALS and a host of other genetic problems. People like this science writer keep saying "We might be able to, but should we?" Of course we should. The opportunity costs of not doing it are potentially enormous.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  Certainly we wouldn't want to bring back passenger pigeons in anything like their former numbers -- they would devastate grain crops like a swarm of locusts. Come to think of it the Rocky Mountain locust is also extinct (the reason for this is unclear, but some believe it was due to farmer's plows uncovering their buried eggs and exposing them to predation). There's a species we don't want back, for sure. Edit: "North American locust" -> "Rocky Mountain locust". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Mountain_locust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Mountain_locust
  - blisterpeanuts 11y ago
    Interesting. I guess we don't want to bring back the Rocky Mountain locust. On the other hand, according to that Wiki article, they may not actually be extinct, just morphed into some other form of grasshopper. Presumably there'd be predators (hawks, falcons, owls, eagles, snakes and other nest invaders, humans with shotguns) that would keep down the pigeon population. But, maybe not. Still, we need to try :)
kbenson 11y ago
I agree with the latter reason, but for Karma, arguments such as that always strike me as odd. It's sort of like admitting that your unwittingly blundering in and making a hash of other people's relationships has caused you to try to try to purposefully insert yourself into more relationships in the future to try to help. Perhaps the lesson being missed there is that you shouldn't intrude in those relationships at all. Glory? Eh, if it's beneficial overall, I don't see too much harm, but it doesn't sway me much. Knowledge is the real inventive here for me. Knowledge is how we advance our species as a whole. It's the only thing that makes this discussion possible, on every conceivable level.

blisterpeanuts 11y ago

(Biology) restores some bio-diversity to the planet. (Cuisine) If passenger pigeons became commonplace again, we could eat them. Regarding your point about knowledge: totally agree. If we could coax extinct life forms back into existence, think of the likely medical implications. Regenerating limbs, repairing brain damage, curing MS and ALS and a host of other genetic problems. People like this science writer keep saying "We might be able to, but should we?" Of course we should. The opportunity costs of not doing it are potentially enormous.

Turing_Machine 11y ago
Certainly we wouldn't want to bring back passenger pigeons in anything like their former numbers -- they would devastate grain crops like a swarm of locusts. Come to think of it the Rocky Mountain locust is also extinct (the reason for this is unclear, but some believe it was due to farmer's plows uncovering their buried eggs and exposing them to predation). There's a species we don't want back, for sure. Edit: "North American locust" -> "Rocky Mountain locust". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Mountain_locust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Mountain_locust
- blisterpeanuts 11y ago
  Interesting. I guess we don't want to bring back the Rocky Mountain locust. On the other hand, according to that Wiki article, they may not actually be extinct, just morphed into some other form of grasshopper. Presumably there'd be predators (hawks, falcons, owls, eagles, snakes and other nest invaders, humans with shotguns) that would keep down the pigeon population. But, maybe not. Still, we need to try :)

kbenson 11y ago

I agree with the latter reason, but for Karma, arguments such as that always strike me as odd. It's sort of like admitting that your unwittingly blundering in and making a hash of other people's relationships has caused you to try to try to purposefully insert yourself into more relationships in the future to try to help. Perhaps the lesson being missed there is that you shouldn't intrude in those relationships at all. Glory? Eh, if it's beneficial overall, I don't see too much harm, but it doesn't sway me much. Knowledge is the real inventive here for me. Knowledge is how we advance our species as a whole. It's the only thing that makes this discussion possible, on every conceivable level.