Did you know that the first fully documented woolly mammoth skeleton was discovered in 1799..Probably not right? Is it ethical for scientist to clone woolly mammoths? Well if they do clone a mammoth and bring them back where would they live? I think it is ethical i say that because they already have the DNA to clone the mammoth . it would be a good thing to experience how there life was before our time.
Woolly mammoths could reach up to 13 feet tall! Having them cloned could also help us learn more about them. We dont know lots of things about them. We dont know how they live,where they slept , where they really lived. Having them could be a good thing but it would also be dangerous to have them. We also wouldn 't know where we would get all the money to clone the mammoth from that is a down fall.
Though woolly mammoths are known for living in the frigid planes of the Arctic, mammoths actually arrived there from a much warmer home. Having the mammoths here could also help cure diseases like cancers and more. many mammoth corpses are so well preserved, scientist have been able to extract DNA from the animals. One particularly good specimen was a female mammoth in her 50s, nicknamed Buttercup, that lived about 40,000 years ago. They put the DNA of the
…show more content…
Animals rely on microbes to help digest food. If the mammoth’s microbes went extinct, the animal may suffer if brought back. "In many cases, the overall phenotypes [physical appearance] of organisms and their ability to digest food is directly tied to the microorganisms in them," said Susan Perkins, a curator at the American Museum of Natural History.So far, Harvard geneticist George Church and colleagues have used a gene-editing technique to insert mammoth genes into the DNA of elephant skin cells. This is far from cloning mammoths, but it is a first step to manipulating the DNA found in mammoth
Words of Wisdom In the novel, Mammoths of the Great Plains, by Eleanor Arnason the story of Emma’s experience with her Grandmother Liza, who through stories, dreams, visions, and experiences of family members, imparts to her knowledge and certain values in a process known as enculturation. Some of the first instances of personal teaching comes across through stories of hunters. Although the story is about mammoths, I believe there is an obvious lesson about who you choose to be in this world and why that is important. For me, in the story of the two hunters, Liza uses this to teach Emma the value of respect, your word, honoring that word, treating others the way you would want to be treated, and the damage it can cause if you choose the
The novel delves into the ethical implications of using human tissue for scientific research and raises questions about informed consent and ownership of biological
The subject of cloning can easily be related to the novel we have been reading, Frankenstein. Both have to do with the topic of bringing life into the world in an unnatural way. Just like bringing the monster to life was viewed differently to different people, cloning is the same. The event of Dolly the sheep, the first adult mammal clone, surviving the cloning process started a huge set of events that has made the amount research about cloning increase exponentially. This is very similar to how Victor Frankenstein creating the monster was the first action of many that eventually lead to his demise.
Another thing is, they must come up with a better solution with the DNA. The frog DNA allowed them to breed because they could change sex from female to male. I would have people do more research on which genes to use to prevent them from mutating.
The first reason why I think should not be in captivity is of what happens in their tank. The first piece of evidence from the PETA practical “Aquariums and Marine Parks” is that since the tanks for the orcas are usually small for them, they get insane because of the echolocation they use. This makes me think that since their fin sometimes curves, that they would get injured while swimming. In addition, this might make the whale die faster than what they are supposed to live to. Other people might say it might non’t affect it
Pros and cons of grizzlies, 3. Cost to rewild and transport grizzly bears, 4. Effects of tourism. Effects grizzly bears have on the environment. In the wild grizzly bears help in seed dispersal when they eat the fruits and plants, then poop out the seeds.
Societies and cultures such as our own can only advance if we learn from previous mistakes, in this case I am talking about extinct species of wildlife. In the past, people have killed a lot of animals in large numbers as they deemed fit for things that include a stable food source, resource, and to affect other peoples as with the bison. Bolen and Robinson made excellent points on this issue about how Americans waged war on Bison as an attempt to take away the Indian’s food source and how that is why the mighty bison is so scarce today (Bolen and Robinson 10). The bison and other examples in the text are great examples of Europeans overkilling and driving species of animals to extinction for various reasons, but it is very important. If we
For example, science says that they can’t get enough DNA from dinosaurs to be able to bring them back because they only have fossils. Wooly mammoths may be easier because their bodies have been frozen in ice making it easier to take the DNA and put it in elephants. This process can bring animals back that can affect our ecosystems in a very big way. They can also alter the ways of life in those ecosystems. But it could also repopulate areas that low in numbers, a very good thing.
Should extinct species be brought back to earth? In my opinion I think that de-extinction is a bad idea. Take the wooly mammoth for example, if scientists were to bring it back they could be taking resources away from other species causing them to disappear, humans might try to harm other animals that aren’t extinct, and scientists would have to successfully re-introduce this animal back into the lifestyle they used to have. Although some people believe that de-extinction is a good thing, I strongly disagree because of those three reasons.
Now, there are some cons to wildlife conservation, but so many more pros. For example, in the book called “Wildlife in the Anthropocene” by Jamie Lorimer she talks about how elephants rarely breed in captivity, but doesn’t explain how. Some good things about elephants in captivity are that they interact with people everyday, and can adapt to various environments. In her book, she never really picks a side so she doesn’t have a strong opinion, but I think they are so crucial to keeping animals alive.
It would make us soon realize how bad it would be to see animals that are needed, disappear but that will never happen! To continue, “ It will reproduce endangered or even extinct species.” The author is trying to say that, the more species that become extinct, or placed on the endangered list, would really have an effect on the whole world. There will most likely be at least one endangered animal for each continent, most likely by the end of this year, or next year. So, once we are able to clone the animals, certain
No. Let nature take its course. Many people say that bringing back extinct animals would drastically improve the ecosystem. However, the habitats of many of the animals that people are trying to bring back have mostly been changed or destroyed. This means the animals may have to relocate, which would result in it being an invasive species, and we all know the unwelcome effects of invasive species.
Many scientists are trying to clone humans but is it ever justified? There are a whole lot of debates on this topic, and I am strongly against it. Human cloning is ethically wrong; there are many risks involved, which will lead to detrimental effects on human society. Before going into my points, I would like to talk about what cloning is. According to the National Human Genome Research Institute, cloning is “a number of different processes that can be used to produce genetically identical copies of a biological entity.”
Most people in our society, no matter what level of education that they may have, have heard of the cloning, specifically the cloning of Dolly the lamb, and have some notions regarding the idea of cloning humans. "The successes in animal cloning suggest to some that the technology has matured sufficiently to justify its application to human cloning" (Jaenisch et al.). However, not every agrees that human cloning is a something that should be put into practice (Hoskins). There generally seem to be two basic divisions on this issue: those who find it inappropriate and unethical, and those who find it a reasonable and necessary step in the progression of scientific research (Lustig).
Do you know that based on the scientific studies, 90% human cloning tuned out to be unsuccessful. Human cloning(modifying babies) is a process of producing new identical babies by altering their genomes. Some of studies show that scientists successfully cloned animals such as cows, Pigs, and sheep. For the past 3-5 years human cloning have a lot of debates and controversies between peoples. However Human cloning is dangerous for the new engineered baby and their moms, so it should be banned to prevent new disease, to constantly limit the population of dying human beings, and to stop unnecessary fees to modify babies.