this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
499 points (99.2% liked)

Science Memes

14232 readers
955 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (14 children)

So what's the genetic difference? If the copy was good enough, surely they would be dire wolves? Also, what is the motivation to bring back dire wolves?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (8 children)

Bringing back species that disappeared because of humans and restoring ecosystems are possible ones. Jurassic Park is another.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago (7 children)

that disappeared because of humans and restoring ecosystems are possible ones

Yeah, 10,000 years ago. Is it really restoring when the ecosystem has been functioning for such a long period without it? Wouldn't it sooner disrupt it?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes. It's utterly useless now (and they aren't being introduced into existing ecosystem to my knowledge). They view it as a proof of concept for more recently extinct species as well as a potential tool for restoring species to ecosystems in the future as extinction events pick up speed.

However, it should be noted that extinction events are a symptom, not the core problem, so I'm not sure exactly where we'd restore extinct species to, since human use of the land is the root cause of most ecosystem collapses, and it's unlikely that they can rebuild populations in the places they died out of (and the land probably won't be yielded back anyway).

Super cool stuff that they did regardless, but can't figure out how it's going to accomplish what they seem to want to accomplish.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah this was my reaction a while back when I saw their promos about how they want to de-extinct wooly mammoths and dodos. Like ok neat, but where are the mammoths supposed to slot in, a rapidly warming arctic that will more likely have palm trees than ice by the end of the century?

I mean I’m being a little obtuse here on purpose—these species choices are obviously guided by marketing potential. No one will pay attention if they resurrect some niche mouse that went extinct a couple years ago, so they’re picking stuff that looms large in pop consciousness.

But in the end, it’s a private company, and I very much doubt their whole goal is to make money off of conservation societies and zoos to make extinct animals—far more likely it’s to refine and recreate new genetic editing procedures which will then get ported into making purpose-built animals for industry (think the sheep who’s milk has certain valuable enzymes or chemicals built in) or like human biotech (so, like, GATTACA).

The “founder” gives off strong Palmer Luckey vibes. (This is based on visual aesthetic and his general demeanor vibes only, he could be a saint, I have no idea)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Yep. Certainly wouldn't be the first time that something is made to seem altruistic but ultimately gets used in questionably-ethical ways.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)