homg.
Did. Did anyone else... just see that? I mean... is it real?
The Discovery Channel has been flashing an advert about how it's theoretically possible to... essentially... do what Jurassic Park did. Only minus the eating of the tourists and frog DNA making girls sprout Y chromosomes. And.. and they're going to try it.
This is probably all one big ( Read more... )
The Discovery Channel has been flashing an advert about how it's theoretically possible to... essentially... do what Jurassic Park did. Only minus the eating of the tourists and frog DNA making girls sprout Y chromosomes. And.. and they're going to try it.
This is probably all one big ( Read more... )
Bringing back a giant extinct species of any -vore persuasion, even plant eaters, on a large scale (pun appropriate but not intended), is probably not feasible as the Earth stands now. This is because dinosaurs filled a niche in the ecosystem, and that niche is now filled by other kinds of animals. Should we bring dinosaurs back, and let the herbivores (even the little ones) roam about eating the food supplies of current herbivores? Then the latter could go extinct. Meanwhile, the giant carnivores? Equally if not moreso a bad idea. Imagine the depredation of ungulate species when T-rex realizes that herds of small hooved things are loads easier to prey on than other massive lizards ever were. Sad day for the African plains.
Meanwhile, as things are, species that ARE fit to be alive in the planet's current type of ecosystem are going extinct because humans are effing up the Earth and taking it all over for our own selfish ends. We really don't need to be putting more species on the planet when we are too stupid to keep the ones currently here viable. Much less species that could, if allowed to breed extensively, go on to kill off more and more "currently here" species either directly, or through usurping their habitat and food sources.
Would it be neat for scientists to hatch a baby dinosaur? YES. I bet the baby dinosaur would be CUTE AND AWESOME. But on the other hand, should scientists be doing that? Not to be a total jerk, but IMO, it's not a good idea. 9.9;; And that is KidK's two cents. KIDK IS OPEN TO PERSUASION ON WHY HER VIEWS MAY BE UNINFORMED OR OUTRIGHT WRONG, TOO.
On the other hand, have you ever had a chance to check out Animal Planet's "Prehistoric Park?" It's a pretty cool show, where they fake it that these scientists are bringing various prehistoric creatures to the present by time travel, to study and care for them. =] It's nifty.
Reply
XD; But no, I see your point. I was under the impression though that it wasn't going to be released into the wild to frolic. Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know. I'd be up for it, if they were going to have it in a zoo-type place. AND it wasn't the sort of saurian that would potentially break out and devour hapless computer nerds sneaking about after dark.
You're right, respawning dinosaurs into our current ecosystem--despite how COOL my inner dino-geek thinks it would be--isn't a good idea at all. And you're also right about the extinct species bit, as sad as it is 6.6 I like to think that maybe, if we clean up our act, though, it could remain a possibility. Even as unlikely a thought as that is. 9.9;
And I LOVE THAT SHOW X'D;; Oh my god, it's like my favorite thing to watch on Animal Planet now that Steve is gone. The bit where the female T-Rex was attacking her brother, because of the bid/raptor-esque influences on the saurian family? GREAT. /dinospaz.
Reply
6.6 The scientist in me is sighing over how improbable any chance of success is, because of the low quality of the DNA they have and because of our not-very-good cloning abilities at present, but the geek in me has been going 'WHOOOO!' and running victory laps with a lampshade on her head in the background since reading that second sentence up at the top there.
Reply
I'mma go be quiet and stop being an annoying naysayer, though. 9.9;
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment