[Cspace]

It's very likely that in the future, we will be able to use the DNA of extinct animals to bring a species back into existence.

Should we do it? Why or why not?

[Troll]

No. There is no point, if there gone there gone. Its natural for these things to happen, tough stuff, live with it.

[Aaron]

I think we should bring a species back into existence, but we should not release it back into the wild. They could seriously disturb an ecosystem that has adapted without them. It would be very neat to have some in captivity, though. Heck, we kind of owe them a debt by killing them all in the first place, so why not bring them back to life?

[Neraphym]

There's no reason not to.

[Bobette]

Edit: Lolz, I've contradicted myself.

What would be the purpose of cloning extinct animals? To show them off?

I think we should bring a species back into existence, but we should not release it back into the wild. They could seriously disturb an ecosystem that has adapted without them.

Good point, Aaron.

Personally, I say we let what's dead and gone stay dead and gone. We've made it fine with what we've got, I see no reason to screw up the ecosystem by introducing back into it what it's succeeded in getting out.

[Neraphym]

Omg, shut up, you! I want to clone a raptor army!!! Don't get in my way!

[x..]

It wouldn't work.

[Yevgeny Borisovitch Volgin]

Extiniction is nature's course. If we meddle with it...










...we're all going to be killed by a army of raptors. The end.

[Zziggywolf5]

It really depends on how long ago it was extinct. If a species died in the past few years, the ecosystem it was in has probably not adapted to its extinction. There would be no problem with reintroducing the species.
If the species has been extinct for a long time, however, the environment has adjusted at least partially to it not being there and adding the species back may cause more damage.

[Bobette]

It really depends on how long ago it was extinct. If a species died in the past few years, the ecosystem it was in has probably not adapted to its extinction. There would be no problem with reintroducing the species.

QFE, good point.

But I still say there's no need.

[Aaron]

But I still say there's no need.

There is no need, but I think we should do it anyways as long as it doesn't use our tax dollars!

[Bobette]

But I still say there's no need.

There is no need, but I think we should do it anyways as long as it doesn't use our tax dollars!

I'm thinking it more than likely will. Research costs.

[Neraphym]

But I still say there's no need.

There is no need, but I think we should do it anyways as long as it doesn't use our tax dollars!

I'm thinking it more than likely will. Research costs.

The technology gained from this could one day save your life. I'm not sure how, but one thing you'll learn about technology is that the most prolific uses of a technology come from things it wasn't designed to be used for. Take the internet for example.

[Aaron]

But I still say there's no need.

There is no need, but I think we should do it anyways as long as it doesn't use our tax dollars!

I'm thinking it more than likely will. Research costs.

Oh, I know. I was just referencing the public's usual outcry . I think government funding for cloning extinct animals is a good idea.

[Cspace]

Extiniction is nature's course. If we meddle with it...










...we're all going to be killed by a army of raptors. The end.

Awesome.

Let's get our weapons ready.

... Wait! No, who took my De-Atomizer?!?!?!!