Sauron97
TS Member
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should"
Dr Malcolm poses a deep and interesting point here about Science vs Ethics and how far it should go, from his perspective as a person who specializes in chaos theory.
Let's forget the could, and assume that a method has been found to bring back near accurate (as in the case in the Jurassic park novels/films where gaps in the code of their damaged DNA strands were filled in with the DNA of non-extinct animals) or absolutely accurate clones of Dinosaurs. We're able to have a real life Jurassic park full of Dinosaur enclosures and exhibitions, along side Theme parks and a giant hotel complex. The most important question then arises. Is it right? Is it playing god? What if it all goes wrong? What are the impacts of new ecosystems if prehistoric plants are also brought back?
Arguments for:
-If successful on any level, it allows us to study Dino behavior and psychology in ways that is impossible with fossil evidence
-The revenue it would generate would be beyond imagination when it is first conceived
-It is a stepping stone for even further scientific progress further down the line
-It's a clone of an animal that has already existed, so in one sense it is not dabbling in trying to create a new form of life
-It would be exciting and fun, so long as you don't get eaten, to visit an enclosure for a Spinosaurus, Carcharadontosaurus, T-rex, Velociraptor , Baryonyx, Brachiosaur ect ect , maybe even go as far as doing some of the stuff they do in Jurassic World, where you can play with Dinosaurs and watch displays
Arguments against:
-Is it right to have this kind of power and responsibility? It's really the fundamental question here.
-Can these animals be contained, or will 'life find a way' If it's in a tropical area, then you've got the risk of storm systems passing over that could damage electric fences, injure people and let the Dinosaurs loose
-Risk of new diseases that these Dinosaurs could bring, we don't want a Pandemic
-If your biotech got in the wrong hands, it could spell a lot of danger
Personally, I'm not sure where I stand, part of me wants to see a T-rex in the flesh and blood so bad, and then when I take it more seriously and bring in the ethics, I sense doubt and concern for the wider implications of this. It's kind of obvious why I'm posing these questions haha, with the new film just about to be released and the new sim game by Frontier (Who happened to the be the guys behind Rct3 and Planet coaster) about to come out, but tech is constantly evolving and improving, and I'll bet that they will bring the Wooly Mammoth back in the next couple of decades so it definitely isn't something off the table.
Dr Malcolm poses a deep and interesting point here about Science vs Ethics and how far it should go, from his perspective as a person who specializes in chaos theory.
Let's forget the could, and assume that a method has been found to bring back near accurate (as in the case in the Jurassic park novels/films where gaps in the code of their damaged DNA strands were filled in with the DNA of non-extinct animals) or absolutely accurate clones of Dinosaurs. We're able to have a real life Jurassic park full of Dinosaur enclosures and exhibitions, along side Theme parks and a giant hotel complex. The most important question then arises. Is it right? Is it playing god? What if it all goes wrong? What are the impacts of new ecosystems if prehistoric plants are also brought back?
Arguments for:
-If successful on any level, it allows us to study Dino behavior and psychology in ways that is impossible with fossil evidence
-The revenue it would generate would be beyond imagination when it is first conceived
-It is a stepping stone for even further scientific progress further down the line
-It's a clone of an animal that has already existed, so in one sense it is not dabbling in trying to create a new form of life
-It would be exciting and fun, so long as you don't get eaten, to visit an enclosure for a Spinosaurus, Carcharadontosaurus, T-rex, Velociraptor , Baryonyx, Brachiosaur ect ect , maybe even go as far as doing some of the stuff they do in Jurassic World, where you can play with Dinosaurs and watch displays
Arguments against:
-Is it right to have this kind of power and responsibility? It's really the fundamental question here.
-Can these animals be contained, or will 'life find a way' If it's in a tropical area, then you've got the risk of storm systems passing over that could damage electric fences, injure people and let the Dinosaurs loose
-Risk of new diseases that these Dinosaurs could bring, we don't want a Pandemic
-If your biotech got in the wrong hands, it could spell a lot of danger
Personally, I'm not sure where I stand, part of me wants to see a T-rex in the flesh and blood so bad, and then when I take it more seriously and bring in the ethics, I sense doubt and concern for the wider implications of this. It's kind of obvious why I'm posing these questions haha, with the new film just about to be released and the new sim game by Frontier (Who happened to the be the guys behind Rct3 and Planet coaster) about to come out, but tech is constantly evolving and improving, and I'll bet that they will bring the Wooly Mammoth back in the next couple of decades so it definitely isn't something off the table.