It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mammoth find: Preserved Ice Age giant found with flowing blood in Siberia

page: 7
54
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2013 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Jiggerj. I hope you do not mind but could you please clarify something for me. By the quote below did you mean using the revival of the mammoth to use it as a food source to solve the worlds hunger crisis... Please specify what you mean exactly by food source. OccamsRazor04 seems to think that your post means exactly that...



Not a circus freak. A food source. Seriously.







posted on May, 31 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by fluff007
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Jiggerj. I hope you do not mind but could you please clarify something for me. By the quote below did you mean using the revival of the mammoth to use it as a food source to solve the worlds hunger crisis... Please specify what you mean exactly by food source. OccamsRazor04 seems to think that your post means exactly that...



Not a circus freak. A food source. Seriously.





I sense that you are appalled by this idea. Do you really think mankind is beyond this? And, yes, if it solves world hunger, then that's what will happen. If it serves big business to bring back to life those plump delicious creatures, then that's what big business will do.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by fluff007
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Jiggerj. I hope you do not mind but could you please clarify something for me. By the quote below did you mean using the revival of the mammoth to use it as a food source to solve the worlds hunger crisis... Please specify what you mean exactly by food source. OccamsRazor04 seems to think that your post means exactly that...



Not a circus freak. A food source. Seriously.





I sense that you are appalled by this idea. Do you really think mankind is beyond this? And, yes, if it solves world hunger, then that's what will happen. If it serves big business to bring back to life those plump delicious creatures, then that's what big business will do.


lack of food is not the cause or reason for world hunger. IF these extinct animals were to be brought back they would not be used as a food source.
edit on 1-6-2013 by bronco73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Hey, those juicy mammoth hamburgers and steaks better not be going to ungrateful poor hungry people in the third world. they would not be able to afford or appreciate the high price of the meat anyways.

see here is the thing, there are literally hundreds of millions of acres in two VERY large countries in which the climate would be perfect for these creatures. Few citizens live outside of the urban centers in these climates and the land just kind of sits there all cold. Enter the mammoth. A very large and economical livestock choice for those rural inhabitants who barely make it in the timber industry.

the mammoth can be commercially harvested for its ivory, meat, and hair/fur/wool?(whatever) economically in climate zones not suited for your typical everyday modern non-extinct elephant.

I don't know about the rest of you, but it would be nice to see ivory become common in art and architecture once again. I don't expect it to solve any hunger problem, because as en entrepreneur farming this livestock, I would like to charge a nice premium to wealthy Western and Chinese consumers for this delicacy meat for a nice ROI.

Any other REAL capitalists out there with me??

Now the real challenge is figuring out how to make them stupid like cows because they are too damn big to be as smart as they are. Would be really difficult herding them around with their independent thinking and whatnot. how did humans make cows dumb enough for the situation we have them in today??
edit on 6/3/2013 by DYepes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by DYepes
Hey, those juicy mammoth hamburgers and steaks better not be going to ungrateful poor hungry people in the third world. they would not be able to afford or appreciate the high price of the meat anyways.

see her


does this mean a burger that never gets cold!?



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Why bring back mammoths? They'll only be slaughtered for their ivory/skulls/coats/etc

...and probably used for some mumbo-jumbo muti, like rhino horn or tiger penis...

I agree with the many saying that we should be able to take care of existing and endangered species and bring back recently extinct species, before we go playing around with species so far removed from their time.

If we were at this point, say, 5000 years ago it might make sense to bring mammoths and others back;
it would be more humane and ecologically correct to wait for the next Ice Age, compare environments to the last Ice Age and make an informed decision whether to bring em back or not.



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by bbracken677
 



Ok...the mammoth is extinct, but there are plenty of animals around that existed at the same time. I sincerely doubt that mammoth food also went extinct. Most of the plants today were living and reproducing when the mammoth walked the earth. Just cause it is extinct doesnt mean everything else from that time period went extinct also.

I mean hell...wheat was around back then. Probably not where these mammoths lived, but you get my point.


My point is that a grazing animal, grazing on unfamiliar foodstuffs, can be much more sensitive to it. We humans are like garbage cans, we can eat almost anything, but grazing animals are much different. If my horses eat the wrong weeds they can die, for example. Just throwing out the caution is all.



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Jimjolnir
 



Why bring back mammoths? They'll only be slaughtered for their ivory/skulls/coats/etc


I'd like to say something altruistic, but the real answer would be...."because we could"....



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Umm no animals have a much higher tolerance for food than humans. Most meat eaters and omnivores can eat rotten and uncooked raw food for instance. They also have a taste for veges that humans find absolutely repugnant.

A plant eater simply eats plants. As long as there is vegetation in its habitat, I am sure the mammoth will do fine. Ready for my Alt Thanksgiving menu of 17 pound mammoth steak for the family. Ill have it served on an ivory platter as well .



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 10:12 PM
link   
I'm SO torn on bringing them back or not. I mean, they went extinct for reasons. We'll never know why but it was for a reason. And to bring them back, awesome as it would be to you know '10 dollars for an elephant.. I mean Mammoth ride'', and for scientists to study them.... it's kinda... creepy.

Let's bring something back that's been gone for 10000 some years just to check how it works, do tests on it, stare at it. I'd hate if ... well, it kinda brings a potential twilight zone thought to mind, if we went extinct and some aliens came around and inhabited the Earth, found one of us in frozen conditions, got our blood and reanimated us. Then did tests, kept us in enclosed places.... but it'd be 'cool' for those aliens to see, huh?

But my god it'd be brilliant to see a living Mammoth.
I don't think it'd survive. What they are used to life wise is farrrrrrrrrrrr different to what the earth is like now. They went extinct for reasons.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


For real...
but, "we could" do a lot of things that we should, but sadly don't. I don't believe we'll reach utopia, it's just the belief that we are worth more.
Sorry to meander into sociology
I know there are great people doing great things for humanity but humanity needs to do great things for the world... or what's the point? :Mammoths! Yay! - millions that could do with desalination plants! Go humans! Woo-haa!
sorry, I'm *just a bit* insane, friendly, but, yeah


---back to the mammoth question; to be, or not to be?



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by bbracken677
 



Ok...the mammoth is extinct, but there are plenty of animals around that existed at the same time. I sincerely doubt that mammoth food also went extinct. Most of the plants today were living and reproducing when the mammoth walked the earth. Just cause it is extinct doesnt mean everything else from that time period went extinct also.

I mean hell...wheat was around back then. Probably not where these mammoths lived, but you get my point.


My point is that a grazing animal, grazing on unfamiliar foodstuffs, can be much more sensitive to it. We humans are like garbage cans, we can eat almost anything, but grazing animals are much different. If my horses eat the wrong weeds they can die, for example. Just throwing out the caution is all.


Mammoths were alive several thousand years ago. Vegetation is the same.



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by fluff007
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Jiggerj. I hope you do not mind but could you please clarify something for me. By the quote below did you mean using the revival of the mammoth to use it as a food source to solve the worlds hunger crisis... Please specify what you mean exactly by food source. OccamsRazor04 seems to think that your post means exactly that...



Not a circus freak. A food source. Seriously.





In case you missed it he replied and confirmed that is indeed what he meant.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Chris Rock had a famous saying

"Just because you can do something does not make it a good idea".


There are any number of reasons this could be a bad idea.
From habitat not being available.
The imune system not being up to survival.
Harming the current gene pool of like species.

To the science fictionish (but no less realistic) idea of introducing some disease this creature is naturally immune to but is a carrier that WE or SOME ANIMAL is not?
Or even so far as a parasite we are not protected from.


Do we not have enough examples of things we have tried that have gone badly wrong. Such as the africanized bee, animals to other countries (delibrately done) that has gone badly ?

To the fact we are not as smart or know as much as we think about genes in general much less a mamoth.

Overall untill we know alot more than we do today cloning a creature from tens of thousands of years ago that all our knowlege on is by theory is a really bad idea.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Finally We can now have our first prehistoric Creature alive in today's world. Now cloners Get back to your jobs. We want our Mammoth now. Lets Hope the next discovery will be T-rex's Blood



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by scrounger
Chris Rock had a famous saying

"Just because you can do something does not make it a good idea".


There are any number of reasons this could be a bad idea.

Only if you completely lack all understanding of what is going on.


From habitat not being available.

They were alive several thousand years ago. It's 100% impossible for the habitat to be extinct.


The imune system not being up to survival.

I don't even know what the heck that means. You think somehow the immune system was evolved in the past few thousand years?


Harming the current gene pool of like species.

There is no current gene pool as they are extinct. How could they possibly harm the gene pool of an extinct species?



To the science fictionish (but no less realistic) idea of introducing some disease this creature is naturally immune to but is a carrier that WE or SOME ANIMAL is not?
Or even so far as a parasite we are not protected from.

It's not only less realistic, it's impossible. Do you think they are using voodoo magic to resurrect dead Mammoth bodies that carry ancient diseases? They are using in vitro fertilization on elephants using Mammoth DNA. Viruses, bacteria, or parasites are 100% impossible to come from that.




Do we not have enough examples of things we have tried that have gone badly wrong. Such as the africanized bee, animals to other countries (delibrately done) that has gone badly ?

What does hybridization of species, or introducing alien species have to do with bringing a dead species back to it's native habitat?



To the fact we are not as smart or know as much as we think about genes in general much less a mamoth.

Why do you think we do not know much about Mammoth's?



Overall untill we know alot more than we do today cloning a creature from tens of thousands of years ago that all our knowlege on is by theory is a really bad idea.


It was not 10's of thousands of years, try 3,000. The only one who lacks knowledge in what is going on is you, not the informed world.



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by konig
Finally We can now have our first prehistoric Creature alive in today's world. Now cloners Get back to your jobs. We want our Mammoth now. Lets Hope the next discovery will be T-rex's Blood

Mammoth's are not prehistoric. Not even close. You're off by a few thousand years.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join