Skip to comments.
Scientists Aim to Revive the Woolly Mammoth
live Science ^
| 11 Apr 05
| Bill Christensen
Posted on 04/18/2005 8:08:56 AM PDT by Drew68
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-167 next last
To: Ashamed Canadian
I agree. These scientists have way tooooooooooo much time on their hands. Why don't they spend their time researching a cure for cancer or somethings. Geez.
141
posted on
04/18/2005 12:10:31 PM PDT
by
diamond6
(Everyone who is for abortion has already been born. Ronald Reagan)
To: Drew68
Now if they could just bring back McDonald's Deep Fried Apple pies!!!
142
posted on
04/18/2005 12:15:24 PM PDT
by
NormB
(Yes, but watch your cookies!!)
To: diamond6
Actually this can help cancer. Here is why, if they can splice Mammoth DNA onto another cell and produce a mammoth then imagine being able to spice healthy DNA onto the cells reproducing defectivly.
You have to do it at some broad point to be able to fine tune it to the organ level. They also have to deal with the fading that dali suffered.
To: Gava
I think you guys are worrying about the wrong end of the stick. It's more likely that a resurrected mammoth would be very susceptible to a modern existing bug that the mammoth bringing an ice age bug here to bug us.
144
posted on
04/18/2005 12:20:02 PM PDT
by
furball4paws
(Ho, Ho, Beri, Beri and Balls!)
To: Lazamataz
Laz with remarks like that you would fit right in at DU.
145
posted on
04/18/2005 12:20:37 PM PDT
by
reagandemo
(The battle is near are you ready for the sacrifice?)
To: reagandemo
Did I tell you my joke about the Appalachian dulcimer?
Q: What's the difference between an Appalachian dulcimer and a hammered dulcimer?
A: A hammered dulcimer burns hotter; an Appalachian dulcimer burns longer.
146
posted on
04/18/2005 12:23:02 PM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(They taunted and gloated with perverse kitty pictures....)
To: wyattearp
That was highly amusing! Asimov had some fun with his theories in one of his non-fiction books.
To: Harmless Teddy Bear
Also a question of when they died out. It might have been as recent as the last few hundred years in North America. Really? I hadn't heard that.
148
posted on
04/18/2005 12:26:28 PM PDT
by
Modernman
("I'm in favor of limited government unless it limits what I want government to do."- dirtboy)
To: Gava
*NOT* easily. Required considerable effort in a lab, not just some critter out walking around.
149
posted on
04/18/2005 12:31:02 PM PDT
by
orionblamblam
("You're the poster boy for what ID would turn out if it were taught in our schools." VadeRetro)
To: Modernman
It might have been as recent as the last few hundred years in North America.
President Thomas Jefferson thought Lewis and Clark might encounter mammoths during their Voyage of Discovery in 1803 and 1804.
150
posted on
04/18/2005 12:31:26 PM PDT
by
The Great Yazoo
("Happy is the boy who discovers the bent of his life-work during childhood." Sven Hedin)
To: Modernman
In 1811 David Thompson reported seeing tracks that his guide told him belonged to a mammoth.
There are numerous reports by Native Tribes that they hunted and killed mammoths into the mid-1700's in the Rockies and there are petroglyphs near the Colorado River IIRC.
151
posted on
04/18/2005 12:40:13 PM PDT
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(The quiet ones are the ones that change the universe. The loud ones only take the credit)
To: orionblamblam
What I meant was that once the procedure was complete, they, the bacteria revived very quickly, easily. I've actually had the pleasure of working with a few species of ancient bacteria. In some cases it takes only milliseconds for the ribosomal networks to become active.
152
posted on
04/18/2005 12:44:29 PM PDT
by
Gava
To: Drew68
Seems pretty silly to me that most of these scientists probably believe in evolution, yet aren't willing to leave its supposed results alone. They don't know the temperment of these creatures, but they're willing to risk human lives to revive a species that no longer fits the planet in its present state. How illogical and wasteful is that?
153
posted on
04/18/2005 1:01:48 PM PDT
by
skr
(May God bless those in harm's way and confound those who would do the harming)
To: Drew68
Just because we could do something, does not mean we should.
This just has disaster written all over it.
154
posted on
04/18/2005 1:03:55 PM PDT
by
trubluolyguy
("If the enemy is in range, so are you")
To: najida
mmmmmm, woolly mammoth, aaaauuugggghhhh....
Homer J. Simpson
155
posted on
04/18/2005 1:06:55 PM PDT
by
trubluolyguy
("If the enemy is in range, so are you")
To: laredo44
>>Does anyone on this planet have any concept of the Law of Unintended Consequences? Anyone?
>You sound like a fundamentalist Luddite. Seriously.
And you sound like a radical techno-utopianist. Seriesly.
I mean, am I not now stuning your beeber via the internet?
156
posted on
04/18/2005 1:43:41 PM PDT
by
Thrusher
(Remember the Mog.)
To: Lazamataz
Dulcimer is that an instrument? Now if it's an instrument you want to talk about then let's talk Banjo, Fiddle, Guitar or Bass. Where I am from we always said that dulcimers were for people who could never play an instrument.
157
posted on
04/18/2005 2:11:58 PM PDT
by
reagandemo
(The battle is near are you ready for the sacrifice?)
To: Thrusher
No progress is good progress, that about it? Were you peeing your pants when the first astronauts came back from the moon? Could have contaminated the planet with moon germs. Seriously.
158
posted on
04/18/2005 2:16:50 PM PDT
by
laredo44
(Liberty is not the problem)
To: skr
Seems pretty silly to me that most of these scientists probably believe in evolution, yet aren't willing to leave its supposed results alone. Just because scientists believe in evolution does not mean they cannot tamper with the results.
They don't know the temperment of these creatures, but they're willing to risk human lives to revive a species that no longer fits the planet in its present state.
I would have to say that the risks to humans is probably quite small.
How illogical and wasteful is that?
Scientific progress has never been constrained by fear of risk. Throughout history great men have taken monumental risks in the name of science. There's nothing illogical about it. To be able to successfully clone extinct species of complex, multicellular organisms would be a scientific breakthrough of the highest order.
As far as wasteful? See my post# 124.
159
posted on
04/18/2005 2:28:32 PM PDT
by
Drew68
To: The Great Yazoo
You may be right. I wouldn't be willing to bet my children's lives on it, though (which is my point).On the threat-to-children scale I'd put this somewhere between Nerf Balls and Pokémon. My kids'll be alright..
160
posted on
04/18/2005 2:35:00 PM PDT
by
AntiGuv
(™)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-167 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson