Tazzy Tiger

[Aelia Jusa]

Originally posted by LennonCook: Ah yes, the Tiger scenario... they`ve had the embryo preserved in alchohol for 10 years or more. They hope to re-establish the species by the end of the decade, but I don`t think that will be possible. They have one preserved speciman and ONLY one preserved speciman as far as i`m aware. The scientists would have to create atleast one male and two female specimans for this project to work; if they only have one, and no partner, it would be impossible to revive unique identities... with only one partnership, they would cause inbreeding and thus, defects. If we have enough money for what is obviously a doomed project, I don`t see why little Jonni doesn`t have us helping 3rd World countries through the heavy taxes we already pay for these things. Oh, wait- every cent of tax we pay according to government policies has to either go to a doomed project, or cabinet salary.

They actually have a number of specimans. And the dead DNA is reacting as if it were alive, which apparently is a good sign (ignornamus here ). So it's not doomed.

Lennon, we can't give all our money to aid third world countries. That's what the budget is for - to allocate funds to different areas, foreign aid being one, education and research and development another. And projects such as these are hardly frivolous (nor doomed, as you would know if you paid attention to the news) - they help aid understanding in gene technology among other things. Try not to make silly generalisations like "every cent of tax we pay according to government policies has to either go to a doomed project, or cabinet salary" - such a blatant untruth doesn't achieve anything.

[Azred]

Oh, well, then. If the preserved DNA is reacting viably and they have several specimens from which to select good nucleotide threads, then the outlook is more rosy. It would be really fascinating to learn that that science can, in fact, resurrect an exinct species.

On the other hand, should science resurrect an extinct species? If yes, then should science try to resurrect human remains?

[Scholarcs]

Right, I attended a lecture on this not so long ago so here is what is possible and what is not:

1) Dinosaurs, no.
2) Wolly Mamoths, yes.

In Jurassic Park they took DNA from blood found in mosquitos. But this couldnt happen in real life due to the fact that the DNA is damaged after a time and is not readable etc. After about 10,000 years at 15ºC DNA isnt readable. However when it is frozen it can last for up to 100,000 years. So technically it would be possible to retrieve anything that was frozen less than 100,000 years ago.
But would it be such a good thing bringing them back? We would be bringing them back simply for the zoos. They would have no parents to learn from, they would be isolated and sad.

But on the Tasmanian Tiger - its good, there are already tigers in the world, and if we could bring them back it would be good.

[Aelia Jusa]

Originally posted by Azred: Which species will serve as the surrogate mother?

They're going to use the tasmanian devil.

Actually, Scholarcs, the idea is not to make them a laboratory or zoo freak - they want to put them back in the wild. I don't know if they will be able to, but that's the plan anyway [img]smile.gif[/img]