Listening to this and thought others might enjoy it. They discuss the differences between this and Jurassic Park. Still, there seem to be a lot of environmental and ethical considerations. Not sure this is a great idea, but it's pretty fascinating either way. Sam Harris | #394 - Bringing Back the Mammoth Sam Harris speaks with Ben Lamm about his work at Colossal Biosciences. They discuss his efforts to de-extinct the woolly mammoth, the Tasmanian tiger, and the dodo; the difference between Colossal’s approach and Jurassic Park; the details of resurrecting the mammoth; the relevance of this work to human health; the role of artificial intelligence; reintroducing mammoths, Tasmanian tigers, and dodos back into the wild; the environmental and business case for de-extinction; and other topics. Ben Lamm is a technology and software entrepreneur. He is the CEO of Colossal Biosciences, which he co-founded alongside biologist George Church with the goal of resurrecting extinct species. Ben is also a fellow of The Explorer’s Club, and he serves on the scientific advisory board of The Planetary Society. Website: Home - Colossal Twitter: @BenLamm
I can understand the desire to reconstitute those species recently extinct due to humans like passenger pigeons and Tasmanian tigers etc over those that went extinct for other reasons but there will be significant unforeseen consequences for any of it. It is axiomatic that nature abhors a vacuum and the ecological niches of fauna from the past have been filled for the most part by current critters. OTOH those extinct species had a role in maintaining a healthy ecosystem. Thinking that when wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone NP, it caused moose to avoid certain habitats which allowed certain plant species that provided nesting habitat for an endangered bird to regrow. OTOH it would be “interesting” to watch humans cope with Giant Short-faced bears - they stood 6 foot tall at the shoulder, weighed in excess of 1,500lbs and its theorized they were very fast (40 mph) able to outrun their prey. Their nearest current relative is the spectacled bear in S.Am - a bear with a particularly nasty disposition. They went extinct ~ 15K years ago.
I've been hearing that we are close to doing this for at least a decade now from the company that first cloned a dog about 20 years ago
Big pack animals are great for frozen tundra. Guy in Russia has large scale test proving how they benefit and help sustain permafrost
Can you imagine how much food is required to maintain 1500 lbs carnivores, capable of running 40 mph? (Apparently, more than their environment could supply).
Just looked them up and apparently they were giant land buzzards that didn’t actually kill their own food because their limbs were too thin for that kind of acceleration.
https://courier.unesco.org/en/articles/sergey-zimov-thawing-permafrost-direct-threat-climate Beyond the Arctic Circle, in the heart of northern Siberia, Russian scientist Sergey Zimov has created Pleistocene Park – to reconstitute the ecosystem of the Ice Age by reintroducing large herbivore species into the former Mammoth steppe, where the soil had become severely depleted. Restoring these ecosystems could also help halt the thawing of the permafrost, a gigantic layer of glacial ice that traps billions of tons of organic carbon. As it melts, the microbes that dwell here quickly convert formerly frozen organic matter into carbon dioxide and methane. The release of these greenhouse gases as a result of climate change is a threat that has long been ignored.
Glad you asked. 1,500lb carnivore needs 15,000 calories (22 calories for every kg and they are 680 kgs). A human body has 125,000 calories of food available to a predator. So they only need to eat one person a week. Not it!
That’s another theory. Animals with thin limbs are also capable of speed - ie horses, deer, WR vs OL. They were so huge for some reason. Would be an advantage for a predator.