The ethics of cloning extinct animals

[No_God]

I am PRO cloning. But unless they are cloned solely for captivity or we drastically change the way we are living they will never be able to survive since... well... we killed them off by accident by destroying habits and shit.


Also, don't mix Dino DNA with amphibian DNA. We've all seen Jurassic Park.

[Minimalist]

I can think of one way that it is unethical.

http://www.sciscoop.com/2003-2-6-8840-98171.html

Efforts to begin establishment of a Siberian hunting preserve to allow any revived mammoth clones to be hunted by paying customers armed with flint-tipped wooden spears were not discussed in the Vector press release.

You have to know that scumbags like Dick Cheney aren't going the flint-tipped spear route. They'll use an anti-tank rocket and prance around like great white hunters.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Bugger ethics, clone away!

Sometimes, I'd like to see a good mammoth.

Boru

[Esquilax]

I know it'd be really cool to see it happen, but here's my contention: I live in Australia, where the ecosystem has been damaged and changed by the introduction of foreign species in the past, like cane toads and wild rabbits and so on. If we start cloning extinct animals, as some point, at least a few will get out.

And then we'll see how an ecosystem can cope with feral mammoths.

[KUSA]

If they get out of hand we can always get our flint tipped spears out.

[Jackalope]

I question whether we have the wisdom to "fix" what we have already fucked up.

That being said, I have to ask: how do they taste?

[Doggey75]

I would totally wanna start a Jurassic Park. Let's start the cloning >: )

[Justtristo]

I want to bring back extinct animals to see how they taste.

I'd imagine rather beefy. It seems as if some of the oldest living animals have a beef like texture to their meat. (Shark and alligator r what I've tried)

Salt Water Crocodile (which I have tasted) is a like lot chicken, But I have never tasted Shark meat.

Emu and Kangaroo is a lot like Venison although, very dark, very strong flavour.

[salamenfuckyou]

I understand where people are coming from with their uncertainty regarding cloning.
"Think about how you would feel if you were placed in a world thousands and thousands of years beyond your time period, think about that terrifying feeling". It seems to me today that society has separated into ignorant common people, and scientists. I mean, why do scientists - that are many times smarter than you - have to listen to your moral claptrap. We are halted by these morally correct people that feel it is "wrong" to clone animals.

The same counts for stem cell research and rejuvenating aging, the same case. People are spewing moral lines of wisdom to scientists. When did we start getting so afraid of being immoral. What about guns, the atomic bomb, biological weapons, GM food etc.
If we are so afraid of doing wrong, how are ever going to improve?

The more I hear about random people in society having such a big influence on science, the more pissed I get. Especially when religious people get involved.

[Clueless Morgan]

I understand where people are coming from with their uncertainty regarding cloning.
"Think about how you would feel if you were placed in a world thousands and thousands of years beyond your time period, think about that terrifying feeling".

It's not like we'd be recreating the plot of Encino Man by cloning a neanderthal. The cloned creature in particular would never know anything other than "our" time. It's not like if you cloned a neanderthal you would also be cloning all that neanderthal's memories of their previous life living 100,000 years ago. They would grow up knowing nothing other than this time period, this state of technology, this generation.

Unless you're positing that cloning necessarily also clones the memories of the cloned creature, which I'm not convinced is the case.

It's like the line in Jurassic Park where Ellie says "these [dinosaurs] are aggressive living things that have no idea what century they're in" like they had some idea of what century they were living in before they went extinct. No, they didn't. They have instincts, sure, they gain an understanding of food sources and the things they require to stay alive, absolutely, but it's not like they keep a calendar marking that they lived in 37,478th year of the Cretaceous period.

It seems to me today that society has separated into ignorant common people, and scientists. I mean, why do scientists - that are many times smarter than you - have to listen to your moral claptrap. We are halted by these morally correct people that feel it is "wrong" to clone animals.

I don't necessarily think it's wrong, but I have some questions about how it would be used and the implications of its use, especially if we employ cloning in the farming industry.

Think about it: Let's say that cloning becomes the new best way to breed farm animals or crops; it becomes the most economical way to build herds such that it becomes the new standard for industrial farming. You clone a particularly healthy and hearty sheep or cow or tomato so that all the specimens are genetically identical. Then a disease mutates such that that sheep or cow or tomato is then susceptible to that disease, it begins spreading through the herds or crops and it completely decimates the entire population. It could have devastating consequences on national, or international, food supplies.

The other place I could see cloning being use is in the health fields, which can get into questions of cloning vs. stem cells and growing a whole human in order to harvest just their liver or kidney or whatever, like The Island.

I don't know that cloning would be employed in the farming industry, or to what extent it would be used in the health fields, but they're questions that I have.

The same counts for stem cell research and rejuvenating aging, the same case. People are spewing moral lines of wisdom to scientists. When did we start getting so afraid of being immoral. What about guns, the atomic bomb, biological weapons, GM food etc.
If we are so afraid of doing wrong, how are ever going to improve?

Are you advocating that we should be doing "wrong" so long as it means we're "improving?"

Are you suggesting that the ends justify whatever means it takes to achieve those ends?

If you are, then I disagree.

Why can't we strive for ways of improving that don't involve doing "wrong", or being immoral, or that minimize doing harm? Why do you think improvement and immorality go hand in hand? Why can't we strive for improvement along side, to the best of our ability, moral decision making?

I don't think this is a conversation that will ever have an end as our morality as a species is constantly in flux to some degree and the whole world will never be in complete agreement about everything. Striving for a thing doesn't mean we will necessarily achieve that thing, but we can try our damnedest to do the least harm and the most good in pursuit of science, and even though science goes after some questionable fields of study with moral implications, it's important to have the conversation and not just unthinkingly plow forward with any idea because it might improve something. Yes, it might improve something in the short term, but it might worsen much more in the long term.

The more I hear about random people in society having such a big influence on science, the more pissed I get. Especially when religious people get involved.

The more I hear about random people in society with deep pockets and an ax to grind having such a big influence on politics, the more pissed off I get.