Giant cattle to be bred back from extinction

This is a good attempt to bring an animal to life that has been extinct. It is fascinating that one day these animals would be amongst us again.

But ethically speaking, if an species is extinct then should we recreate it? Or will that endanger the balance of the wild life and will it have an effect on nature?

Aurochs were immortalised in prehistoric cave paintings and admired for their brute strength and "elephantine" size by Julius Caesar.

But despite their having gone the way of the dodo and the woolly mammoth, there are plans to bring the giant animals back to life.

Now Italian scientists are hoping to use genetic expertise and selective breeding of modern-day wild cattle to recreate the fearsome beasts which weighed around 2,200lb and stood 6.5 feet at the shoulder.

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk...

Well.. depends ?

Were or was human involved in the animals extinction ?

I think it would be cool. But, if it's wise to do ? My gut says, Don't do it !!

Nice thread !

Peace !!

I've heard rumours that Affliction, Strikeforce and World Victory Road Sengoku are already in talks with the Italians to sign these beasts up to their organisations. I didn't believe them at the time, but now I'm not so sure...

Dana?

(Get it? Julius Caesar? Colosseum? Fall of Rome 'n' all that?)

No?

reply to post by sunny_2008ny

ethically speaking, if an species is
extinct then should we recreate it?

I don't understand. Assuing you have no problem with breeding cattle in captivity in the first place, what possible ethical concern could there be with breeding trying to recreate an extinct species? If you want to suggest that it might have unforeseen consequences...ok. But how is this an ethics question?



[edit on 19-1-2010 by LordBucket]

reply to post by LordBucket

I don't understand. What possible ethical concern could there be? If you want to suggest that it might have unforeseen consequences...ok. But how is this an ethics question?

Are we as humans rightful in creating a species that have been extinct. Or should we stay away from it? And then what control do we have on which group of scientists brings back from extinction what species?

Old news: they've had various auroch breeding programs for many decades now.

s2-us2.startpage.com...

Above is a link to a quick and dirty search page. I first heard of rebreeding aurochs back in the '70s, I think.

reply to post by sunny_2008ny

Are we as humans rightful in creating a species that have been extinct.

I still don't understand the question. You've rephrased it, but you still havent' explained how ethics has anything to do with it. What constitutes "rightful?" What criteria are you using to judge such a thing? Why is breeding a new species any morally/ethically different from breeding animals and not making a new species?

And then what control do we have on which group of
scientists brings back from extinction what species?

"We" who? You mean the two of us personally? Probably very little. Why does that matter? As for the scientists...presumably they'll pick what they want to do, or what they can get funding for, and try to recreate that.

[edit on 19-1-2010 by LordBucket]

reply to post by apacheman

Above is a link to a quick and dirty search page. I first heard of rebreeding aurochs back in the '70s, I think.

What is the link that you have given? And what does it have to do with this thread?

reply to post by LordBucket

What criteria are you using to judge such a thing?

If nature has made some species extinct, then who are we humans to recreate them? Are we not tinkering with nature?

"We" who? You mean the two of us personally? Probably very little. Why does that matter? As for the scientists...presumably they'll pick what they want to do, or what they can get funding for, and try to recreate that.

Does it not matter that the world community knows what the scientists are recreating? I mean if there is a species that is not wanted here and someone recreates it, how do we ensure that this does not happen. For example if someone were to recreate dinosuars, would you not like to have control?



[edit on 19-1-2010 by sunny_2008ny]

There's a Evidence that many Extinct animals are already here, we just brainwashed

reply to post by sunny_2008ny

If nature has made some species extinct, then who are we
humans to recreate them? Are we not tinkering with nature?

...so by this logic, written language and concrete buildings are both unethical because both are the result of "tinkering with nature" too?

Who are you to wear clothes? Are you not tinkering with nature?
Who are you to farm and irrigate food? Is that not tinkering with nature?

At some point I think it's healthy to accept that humans are part of nature. The things that we do are not "unnatural" simply because we do them. For example humans and beavers both build dams. Are beaver dams "natural" but human dams "unnatural?" I say no.

I mean if there is a species that is not wanted here and
someone recreates it, how do we ensure that this does not happen.

"Not wanted" by whom? Nature? Explain to me please what this "nature" thing is. You appear to be anthropomorphizing something...but I'm not entirely sure what.

For example if someone were to recreate dinosuars,
would you not like to have control?

Sure. But I'd also like to have control over freeway traffic and the weather. Doesn't make either of these ethical issues.

reply to post by sunny_2008ny


It's a link to a search I did for aurochs breeding programs...there's a ton of stuff dating back to Nazi Germany even. You can go to any number of zoos now and find "aurochs' that have been bred back. They aren't exactly aurochs if you ask me, but folks do try.

The point is that this is very old news, aurochs breeding programs are nothing new.

i have no problems with them doing this with mammals
slight problems with them doing with reptiles
huge problems with them doing this with insects.

i don't want to have to deal with dragonflies with a three foot wingspan.

no ethics concerns just ''oh crap it got out of the lab''concerns

reply to post by apacheman

It's a link to a search I did for aurochs breeding programs

Check your link. It doesn't work.

Startpage.com searches do not get fed into the URL of the result page like google searches do. If you look, you'll see that the URL is the same regardless of what search you do.

reply to post by Cadbury


With all due apology, no, I don't get it. Reverse BigMacs, certainly I get. I see bells, magnets and grassy knolls. I also see five hundred putting an end to this madness once the Persians try to invade Canadia. They won't be dissuaded by sorcery and alleged monsters.

Originally posted by Cadbury
I've heard rumours that Affliction, Strikeforce and World Victory Road Sengoku are already in talks with the Italians to sign these beasts up to their organisations. I didn't believe them at the time, but now I'm not so sure...

Dana?

(Get it? Julius Caesar? Colosseum? Fall of Rome 'n' all that?)

No?

LOL. Too bad Affliction is no longer, they put on some good shows.


PS: Do you expect a borefest from Coleman vs Couture? Haha, I'm skeptical on whether it will be a war, or a very boring UD win for Couture.