41 ms·

Only half-joking, isn't this how disaster movies start?

by kreek 15y ago

mkramlich 15y ago
I had a similar reaction. Then read the article, starts off fairly straight-forward, no drama, etc. and then there's this fun paragraph from out of left field: "Tragedy has now struck the Russian team. Dr. Gilichinksy, its leader, was hospitalized with an asthma attack and unable to respond to questions, his daughter Yana said on Friday. On Saturday, Dr. Price reported that Dr. Gilichinsky had died of a heart attack."
- coldarchon 15y ago
  Darwin award becomes recursive here ..
plessthanpt05 15y ago
exactly...my first thought was how this seems like a stones throw away from jurassic park.
leeskye 15y ago
"Tragedy has now struck the Russian team. Dr. Gilichinksy, its leader, was hospitalized with an asthma attack and unable to respond to questions, his daughter Yana said on Friday. On Saturday, Dr. Price reported that Dr. Gilichinsky had died of a heart attack." now...thats the scariest part of that article
adriand 15y ago
This is a common reaction to stories about resurrecting ancient species, but I wonder if it really just means that disaster movies are silly, rather than that these activities are risky. After all, when we consider ancient, extinct species, the organisms in question are likely ill-adapted to survive in the present day. By virtue of having gone extinct, it is a truism that they were ill-adapted to survive the past era in which they disappeared as well. In this case, the plant is nearly identical to its modern relative, but even if we brought back to life a plant or animal that disappeared thousands of years ago, it would be incredibly difficult for it to survive. For one thing, it would typically need other members of the opposite sex with which to breed. It would also be adapted to thrive in a much different environment than today's. These are substantial challenges. Of course, it's possible that reintroducing an ancient species to the present day would be similar to introducing a non-native species to, say, Australia. I'm also not keen on the prospect of reviving ancient microbes and viruses. But I'm not worried about this plant, or about dinosaurs, for that matter.
- baddox 15y ago
  You seem to be claiming that the ancient specimen would likely not thrive; I think we all agree. The sci-fi disaster movie angle would probably be that the ancient specimen is carrying a disease that isn't particularly special except for the fact that no current species (or at least humans) have any immunity whatsoever.
- eru 15y ago
  Being around doesn't have to make a species more likely to survive. Specie don't exist in a vacuum. Like an invasive species, a very old resurrect species, won't have to cope with all its usual predators and parasites.

Only half-joking, isn't this how disaster movies start?

by kreek 15y ago

Only half-joking, isn't this how disaster movies start?

I had a similar reaction. Then read the article, starts off fairly straight-forward, no drama, etc. and then there's this fun paragraph from out of left field: "Tragedy has now struck the Russian team. Dr. Gilichinksy, its leader, was hospitalized with an asthma attack and unable to respond to questions, his daughter Yana said on Friday. On Saturday, Dr. Price reported that Dr. Gilichinsky had died of a heart attack."

coldarchon 15y ago
Darwin award becomes recursive here ..

plessthanpt05 15y ago

exactly...my first thought was how this seems like a stones throw away from jurassic park.

leeskye 15y ago

"Tragedy has now struck the Russian team. Dr. Gilichinksy, its leader, was hospitalized with an asthma attack and unable to respond to questions, his daughter Yana said on Friday. On Saturday, Dr. Price reported that Dr. Gilichinsky had died of a heart attack." now...thats the scariest part of that article

adriand 15y ago

This is a common reaction to stories about resurrecting ancient species, but I wonder if it really just means that disaster movies are silly, rather than that these activities are risky. After all, when we consider ancient, extinct species, the organisms in question are likely ill-adapted to survive in the present day. By virtue of having gone extinct, it is a truism that they were ill-adapted to survive the past era in which they disappeared as well. In this case, the plant is nearly identical to its modern relative, but even if we brought back to life a plant or animal that disappeared thousands of years ago, it would be incredibly difficult for it to survive. For one thing, it would typically need other members of the opposite sex with which to breed. It would also be adapted to thrive in a much different environment than today's. These are substantial challenges. Of course, it's possible that reintroducing an ancient species to the present day would be similar to introducing a non-native species to, say, Australia. I'm also not keen on the prospect of reviving ancient microbes and viruses. But I'm not worried about this plant, or about dinosaurs, for that matter.

baddox 15y ago
You seem to be claiming that the ancient specimen would likely not thrive; I think we all agree. The sci-fi disaster movie angle would probably be that the ancient specimen is carrying a disease that isn't particularly special except for the fact that no current species (or at least humans) have any immunity whatsoever.
eru 15y ago
Being around doesn't have to make a species more likely to survive. Specie don't exist in a vacuum. Like an invasive species, a very old resurrect species, won't have to cope with all its usual predators and parasites.