Sunday, March 24, 2013

Scientists Seek to Bring Back Extinct Species


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/19/science/earth/research-to-bring-back-extinct-frog-points-to-new-path-and-quandaries.html?pagewanted=all


Stanford Professor Hank Greely, recently spoke to a New York Times reporter about the advent of bringing extinct species back to life. Scientists around the world are trying to use new DNA technology to bring back extinct species, such as the wooly mammoth, the saber tooth tiger and the passenger pigeon. The article talks about innovations in DNA science and the different theories surrounding the successfulness of this process. Scientists note that it could be many years before we see the results of these endeavors, and there are ethical, moral and legal issues surrounding the nature of this type of science. 

This article caught my attention because of the nature of this controversial subject. The article does a good job drawing from many different sources and reporting the essential conversation points around bringing a species back into existence. Additionally, I like the use of the media to listen to Greely speak in depth about the subject. Even though we have seen many stories in the past about emerging science that does not come to fruition, I still think that this type of article stands a good purpose. Do you think this is newsworthy? Moreover, I appreciate science and new technology, but I disagree with the actions of the scientists trying to attempt this endeavor. How do you feel about the concept of bringing species back into existence? Did the author throughly cover all the legal, moral and ethical issues?


12 comments:

  1. This is definitely a newsworthy article. Anytime something of the past becomes relevant to the future i think it's important to discuss. I thought the writer of the article did a good job incorporating other examples or studies of bringing back new species and discussing methods of how. As far as how I feel about scientist bringing species back into existence I agree with Serena.I don't feel like it's their place at all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. First of all, if a wooly mammoth and a sabertooth tiger came back to life, I would love to befriend the cast of Ice Age.

    Now that that's out of my system, I agree that this is a very interesting story in terms of the past linking to the future (as Markita said), and technological and scientific advancements. However, Serena poses extremely valid questions in terms of legal, moral and ethical concerns. I believe that as scientists, they are perfectly within their rights to question/consider this possibility and research it (it's their job to do this), but I think actually executing it and bringing back an extinct species is another story entirely. I think that in terms of legal concerns, the courts and authorities should be involved to discuss the consequences of following through with this. How will this affect the human race? What dangers will this pose? What doors will this open (and close) in the future? I feel like there are so many things still to consider from the scientists' point of view.

    That being said, I thought the story was very well-written and engaging.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This article, and I believe many advancing scientific and technological articles like it, is very newsworthy. The story is well written for the laymen to understand the processes that the scientists go through, and the idea to bring back extinct species is interesting and seemingly more possible each day. However, when the story reveals how some species may never be able to be brought back, it loses it's luster. The article seems moot, by then, and the reader can easily lose interest.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This was a really interesting article and the information definitely caught my eye. I think it would be crazy if scientists could actually bring extinct species back to life. I like the video that was included with the article too, as it helped add clarity to the text. I feel like the scientists that want to bring these extinct creatures back to life are out of line trying to do so as well. It's a complex process and I think species that are extinct should remain extinct.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This article is certainly interesting and very newsworthy, I think. In my opinion it is a good thing to, in a way, announce to the public what scientists are capable of doing. So much gets poured into scientific programs that is nice to see what scientists are actually doing. I do no think the article really addresses all of of the moral and legal issues that this scientific development brings up. I also do not believe that humans should be bringing back some of these species. It may seem like a good thing to bring back species that humans killed of, but in instances like the passenger pigeon, their habitat was destroyed by deforestation so how would they survive in a new one?

    ReplyDelete
  6. This article definitely caught my attention as well. It is very newsworthy considering the controversial and slightly mindblowing topic. To think that some of these ancient animals may be able to be brought back through the cloning process and samples or combining of DNA cells is quite fascinating. However, I would have to agree that I do not promote these scientist's actions. There is a reason most of these species went and are extinct..why exactly should we try and bring them back through clones..and will they even survive?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Although I am not typically interested in science related things, like DNA testing and the revival of some species, I found this article especially interesting. The article focuses more on the controversy of bringing back new species, rather than the actual process itself. The angle the author chooses makes the article stand out. Personally, I agree with the scientist that argued, why is there a need to bring back extinct animals? The human race has already killed them off, like the carrier pigeon, so why should we be given the permission to bring them back? It is interesting that there is such a controversy about this topic since usually scientists are pro cloning, and revival of species.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree that this article had a good amount of sources. I think it is news worthy and that the author did a good job of giving all sides a voice and showing the ethical and legal issues. I'm not sure all the issues were covered but I think it was extensive enough for this platform.

    I like the idea of bringing species back to life to an extent. I definitely think the article brought up a good point about the Endangered Species Act. This could harm that act and i would not like that. Also I feel that we should use the money to focus on the animals still living. I think this is interesting and a tremendous step for science. I'm glad they discovered the possibility of this because what if one day cows go extinct or other food sources we rely on heavily; it is a crazy thought now, but you never know. I don't think they should bring extinct species from such a long time ago back but I don't see harm in bringing back species that did not intrude on human existence. Say the polar bear went extinct, which it is heading toward, I don't see harm in cloning them and having them still on earth. It is clearly a controversial subject. I enjoyed the article.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This is definitely a newsworthy article and the author did a good job of summarizing the different views of whether or not it is legal, moral or cost effective. I believe that it would be a bad idea. It's the idea of natural selection or the survival of the fittest motto that brings me to this conclusion. If an animal became extinct, there is a natural reason that brought it there. Evolution happened. Whether a predator eliminated them, the climate change killed them off or a number of things happened, the species is no longer fit to live on this Earth. To bring the animal back would be short lived and would further change our ecosystem. I just don't agree with the idea.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This was a good article. Very good sources, and reputable. All sides of the story were represented well. The Act brings up many good points to bring up in the article. I am not sure how I feel about the many points in the article, but it was definitely news worthy. This article was interesting to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
  11. KYLE WIGGERS: Honestly, I'm not sure I'd call this issue 'newsworthy,' as it hasn't seen new developments recently. It seems that media presents the topic of ancient DNA cloning as more of a discussion than an investigation of feasibility, typically. I must give this article credit: a large portion was devoted to the scientific and biological challenges that researchers face. However, I still question the timeliness of this article, given scientists seem to have made little progress.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I glad to see that the article used a softer lead in the story and didn't present all the facts within two sentences. I wouldn't say it is exactly timeliness because scientists haven't made any scientific breakthrough within the past few months. However, this topic is unique and eyeopening that most people would un-doubtfully read it. I found the video backed up the writings very well and gave us a face to a scientist who would like to bring back extinct species. I'm glad that the writer adressed the ethical issues surrounding the topic because with great scientific possibilities should also come responsibilities.

    ReplyDelete