I think that cloning is a great idea. The only problem is that if we try to make a boy and a girl bucardo and mate them together, there will be problems. The first problem is that if we try to mate them, there will be something wrong with the bucardo. There might be three feet, or one horn. This happens because they are related. If a brother and a sister human made children, there would be something wrong with them. This is what will happen to the bucardo. We might be able to get them back. It might not happen though. This is why we should make sure no other animal species get extinct. It doesn't make any sense to hunt, so we should save our planet!
I actually disagree with Erica because, although this is true with humans, with animals this is often not true. In fact, this is how most people obtained animals in the past. For example, people used to breed hunting dogs to keep or to trade. In order to get more, they couldn't just go out and search for another dog, since normally they would have to trade for it. What they might do is breed 2 dogs and then breed a few from that litter of dogs. And of course this would result in no defected dogs.
The idea of cloning to me has always been really wacky and weird, and to know that scientists are actually attempting it is really cool. Before a little while ago I was probably aware, but did not quite understand that cloning was not just something you would see in a freaky sci-fi movie. The ways the scientists are doing this are clever and cool.
As to the article itself, I thought the topic and idea was cool but the article a little disappointing. This is mostly because they went off topic a lot, speaking of the cloning of other animals. I really wish they had focused more on the actual experiment on the bucardo. Overall I give the article 7 out of 10 stars.
I think this was an interesting article. It is complicated to think about cloning an animal. I wonder if they really could make a living, breathing animal that could live for a long time. Also, the article spoke about reversing the embryos from male to female in mice, but if they tried that in the bucardo, would it really work? The difference between male and female bucardos are very different than the difference between male and female mice. When we consider cloning the bucardo, it seems that the scientists are doing this as an experiment, but it would be very challenging to actually bring back a whole species. However, the scientists have spent 13 years trying to bring back one healthy bucardo, yet if they do not plan to renew the species, why did they spend so long making one? Also, liquid nitrogen seemed to have preserved Celia's cells pretty well, and it would be very useful to keep this in mind for other experiments. However, we don't quite know whether the nitrogen may have affected the cells a little. I wonder if the failure in the lungs of the first baby was a result of a malfunction in the cells, or if there was something wrong in the procedure. Overall, I think that this idea of bringing back an animal is intriguing but not necessarily important. After all, as Erica pointed out, it would be wiser if we could just learn from our mistakes.
I hope that they are able to bring a similar or almost exact replica of the bucardo and bring the dead species back to life. I mention similar because I was thinking that maybe the scientists could create a different species all together by mating the clone of Celia and another closely related species. They mention this idea and say that they could do this and then breed it so that it is more like a bucardo, but what if they don't breed it a certain way and just let it be what it would become. It might be a hybrid species, or it might end up being one of the two species that gave birth to the baby. Also, I agree with what Erica said in the last part of her comment. We need to make sure that no more animals go extinct. We are spending all this money, time, and effort into bringing back a dead species when we wouldn't have to spend any of it if we just made sure it didn't go extinct in the first place. Finally, I want to give this a rating 6 out of 10 because although the topic was good and the content was okay, but it could have supplied us with more information and could have been better overall.
While I find it amazing that we can now make extinct animals come back, I am not sure if this development is good or bad. I think in the case of some animals such as the bucardo, it is fine to bring them back to life. However, there are also many more dangerous animals that are extinct that could potentially be brought back to life. For example in the movie Jurassic Park, dinosaurs were brought back with terrible consequences. I'm not saying that the movie's sequence will be exactly repeated, but there could still be consequences. Consequences could occur for animals less dangerous than dinosaurs also. For example, the Carolina Parakeet is an extinct bird. But when it was still living, it was a menace to many farmers by destroying their crops and since it was rendered extinct in 1918, its extinction has not made a major impact on our environment. However, I also think that this development could be useful and that we should also perfect this technology so that if we ever need to use it then it will be available. If the time ever comes that an animal goes extinct and makes a big impact on our ecosystem (such as an overpopulation of another species), we can immediately put this technology into effect. In conclusion I think that this development in science is an intriguing one and should be worked on, but I also think that we should not hasten to use it.
I think that was inspiring. To think that we can clone extinct animals would be wonderful for future generations. I think that if we keep persevering we can conquer this challenge to bring back extinct animals.
I find that I agree with both Erica and Lilah that for dogs there were no problems, but have we tried breeding them now after evolution. We don't know for sure that nothing will happen to them anything is possible. As I am sure you know, some dogs are born without a leg or an ear, but does that mean that it was because their parents were related. If you think about it maybe it could have been an incident that could have caused having on leg. The mother could have run into something or the pup came out early. There is no way to tell if the same things happen to animals because we were not there. Overall I agree with both Lilah and Erica.
I have mixed feelings about this discovery. I don't know whether to be amazed that a group of people brought a species of extinct goat back to life or to be unhappy that someone would change the course of nature. So in other words, I agree with both Erica's point of view and Lilah's.
I have mixed feelings about this discovery. I don't know whether to be amazed that a group of people brought a species of extinct goat back to life or to be unhappy that someone would change the course of nature. So in other words, I agree with both Erica's point of view and Lilah's.
I am so surprised that scientists can clone another living species! I feel that Erica and Lilah are both correct in different ways. Erica is correct because of her metaphor of brother and sister humans and if they have children the baby will be defected. Also, Lilah is correct, although humans can be defected at birth animals can be defected sometimes. But overall I bet everybody can agree that this is an interesting topic!
The idea of cloning to me is a bit high-strung. But even so, I thought this was an awesome awesome article. Personally, I think that this event in 2003 should get way more attention considering it is the first de-extinction in history. Ive always heard of people talking about cloning, but this is different. Still seems kind of crazy that people are actually bringing an extinct animal back to its clutches and former glory as an endangered, not extinct however animal.
The idea of cloning to me is a bit high-strung. But even so, I thought this was an awesome awesome article. Personally, I think that this event in 2003 should get way more attention considering it is the first de-extinction in history. Ive always heard of people talking about cloning, but this is different. Still seems kind of crazy that people are actually bringing an extinct animal back to its clutches and former glory as an endangered, not extinct however animal.
The idea of cloning to me is a bit high-strung. But even so, I thought this was an awesome awesome article. Personally, I think that this event in 2003 should get way more attention considering it is the first de-extinction in history. Ive always heard of people talking about cloning, but this is different. Still seems kind of crazy that people are actually bringing an extinct animal back to its clutches and former glory as an endangered, not extinct however animal.
This was soo cool because the experiment was to clone an extinct animal. I think that that is a great idea because you can learn so much about life before us just from a small cell sample from the species. I think that Erica and Lilah both have very good points. It was interesting to read their comments and I loved reading about what they have to say. I learned a lot about this even thought the one that died was still a work in progress. I really enjoyed reading this article because it taught me so much about the bucardo. I really liked this article but I also agree with Lilah that the article should have been more straight forward they talked a lot about cloning other animals, and I found that a bit distracting. Overall I really like this idea and maybe someday we can make the bucardo come back out of extinction if we preserve them, and take care of them.
I enjoyed reading this article, but it was sad and now I really want the next attempt to be successful. Why would the lung have been punctured in the first place? If scientists are able to clone one bucardo, will they be able to have it mate with another goat species? If this works, than will the outcome have characteristics of only the bucardo even if it was selectively bred or be pure bucardo? Like always, there are going to be things that go wrong the first time, but we learn from them and we make it better each time even if it takes numerous tries. The next time if scientists try another attempt, they could try to make two, a male and a females. then they could either breed the two together, or breed them with a Spanish ibex or something of the sort. It's likely something will go wrong and it will become another failure, but that doesn't mean they should not keep trying. On the other hand as Erica pointed out, we should also try to make an effort to take action sooner, stop hunting of rare species, learn about more species before some of them go extinct and we'd never know it.
I really think this article was interesting and fun to read. Other than it getting off topic alot like Lilah said, I thought it was a well-written article. I would rate it an 3 out of 5 stars. This article also made an idea come into my head. If we have the DNA of the female bucardo Cilia, we could put that DNA into the egg of another goat that is closely-related to the bucardo, like they did a few years ago. The offspring was born but died a few minutes after birth and thus this experiment didn't succeed. I think the problem with the experiment was that because Cilia's DNA had been frozen for such a long time, one of the genes wasn't right somehow which cased the lung defect in the clone of Cilia. Overall, I thought this was a good article.
We have done a great deal of damage to our planet through over hunting and habitat destruction. We have driven many species to extinction. What if for the first time, technology could not only destroy life, but actually create it? Recently, scientists have discovered technology to clone animals. This technology sounds really great, but the long term effects may not so great. Once this technology becomes commercially available, who will get to use it? We can't stop people from using it once it becomes public for whatever purposes they want. Some people may want to use it for bringing extinct animals back to life, while others might use it for bringing people back to life or becoming almost immortal. Where would we draw the line? Well, there would be no more line, because anyone could bring dead people or extinct species back to life. One of the scary aspects of this is that we don't know how this would change the world. Bringing the extinct animals back to life might result in new diseases which would change the entire balance of the ecosystem. Another thing to consider is why we are bringing them back to life? Could a mammoth that lived during the Ice Age really survive in today's world? If the only place we can leave these animals is in zoo's, is it really right to bring them back? To sum up, cloning is one of those things that sound great, but may have some pretty serious consequences. We have done a great deal of damage to our planet through over hunting and habitat destruction. We have driven many species to extinction. What if for the first time, technology could not only destroy life, but actually create it? Recently, scientists have discovered technology to clone animals. This technology sounds really great, but the long term effects may not so great. Once this technology becomes commercially available, who will get to use it? We can't stop people from using it once it becomes public for whatever purposes they want. Some people may want to use it for bringing extinct animals back to life, while others might use it for bringing people back to life or becoming almost immortal. Where would we draw the line? Well, there would be no more line, because anyone could bring dead people or extinct species back to life. One of the scary aspects of this is that we don't know how this would change the world. Bringing the extinct animals back to life might result in new diseases which would change the entire balance of the ecosystem. Another thing to consider is why we are bringing them back to life? Could a mammoth that lived during the Ice Age really survive in today's world? If the only place we can leave these animals is in zoo's, is it really right to bring them back? To sum up, cloning is one of those things that sound great, but may have some pretty serious consequences.
I think that this article was very interesting. Firstly, I think that cloning will take a couple of generations to get an exact copy. I think that since Science has come so far in the field of cloning, they will figure a way to alter the gender of a clone. Also, I think that not all clones will be defected, only this one. One of the problems the scientists may encounter is that two clones that mate may not make a perfect "baby". In total, I give this article an eight of ten stars.
I guess I liked the idea of this article, but I'd have to agree with Clyde: you could look at this article and say that these people are ruining the course of nature by trying to recreate an animal that's extinct. It's nice to be able to remember and learn about extinct animals, but trying to clone them, I think, isn't really necessary. However, I did enjoy reading this article overall.
I read Yvette's comment and I think she proposed an excellent question. What if this technology becomes public and it gets into the wrong hands? As she said, people could use this technology to make themselves live longer, or bring people back from the dead, or a bunch of other crazy stuff that people never thought were possible! She also made another fantastic point. Why are we bringing these animals back from extinction anyways? Where would we keep them? What would we do with them? Could they even survive in our world today?
I've heard of cloning before, but I've never heard of cloning animals that were frozen in liquid nitrogen! This article is really interesting, and the things technology can do these days is just amazing. However, I'm not sure if it is exactly a great idea. It would be nice if we could bring an extinct species back, but something might go wrong. The idea is great, but the result might not turn out how you wished it did. Like Lilah said, I didn't like how the article went off topic a lot. I kept getting confused between what they were talking about. I also just wanted to really learn about the bucardo, so when they started throwing other things into the article, I couldn't focus on what I wanted to know more about. Overall I thought that it's really cool how scientists can do these kind of things, but at the same time dissappointed in what had happened to previous animals.
I think that this is a great idea. Since in the past there have been a lot of great creatures that have gone extinct. However the only problem is cloning an animal can lead to terrible side problems. In my opinion it is important to get the bugs out with non-extinct animals first so that when they try to clone an extinct animal it is not defective. Overall I think that cloning is a great idea that can really make an impact.
I think that the resurrection of a lost species is incredible. The breeding, in my opinion, should not produce any odd results. Though it is true that with brother and sister humans there is a 50% chance that they have the same mutation and will pass it on to their children, it is different with animals, as Lilah said. I did some research and the bucardo was a very interesting animal, and so is the fact that the scientists are trying to turn regular mountain goats into bucardos. So overall, I think this article was informative and interesting, but not really surprising
Cloning is a topic that I feel is overlooked. Bringing back animals that have become extinct so they can live on this world again is a great invention by scientists. The problem is, we can't quite get it to work. The article's example was about cloning an extinct animal called the bucardo. The bucardo is a mountain goat that went extinct in 2000. Although there is no general reason why they went extinct, it is believed that they could not compete for food with other animals, and there was poaching. By taking cells and nuclei, then freezing them in liquid nitrogen, they were able to preserve some of the bucardo. They then tended to these nuclei and mixed them in with goat eggs. One goat/bucardo was born, but died within the first few minutes because of a lung issue. In the article, they also discussed different ways to clone. My opinion is that if scientists continue to experiment different ways to clone, they will be able to find a way to bring back extinct animals. Besides extinct animals, they may also be able to bring back endangered animals too.
26 comments:
I think that cloning is a great idea. The only problem is that if we try to make a boy and a girl bucardo and mate them together, there will be problems. The first problem is that if we try to mate them, there will be something wrong with the bucardo. There might be three feet, or one horn. This happens because they are related. If a brother and a sister human made children, there would be something wrong with them. This is what will happen to the bucardo. We might be able to get them back. It might not happen though. This is why we should make sure no other animal species get extinct. It doesn't make any sense to hunt, so we should save our planet!
I actually disagree with Erica because, although this is true with humans, with animals this is often not true. In fact, this is how most people obtained animals in the past. For example, people used to breed hunting dogs to keep or to trade. In order to get more, they couldn't just go out and search for another dog, since normally they would have to trade for it. What they might do is breed 2 dogs and then breed a few from that litter of dogs. And of course this would result in no defected dogs.
The idea of cloning to me has always been really wacky and weird, and to know that scientists are actually attempting it is really cool. Before a little while ago I was probably aware, but did not quite understand that cloning was not just something you would see in a freaky sci-fi movie. The ways the scientists are doing this are clever and cool.
As to the article itself, I thought the topic and idea was cool but the article a little disappointing. This is mostly because they went off topic a lot, speaking of the cloning of other animals. I really wish they had focused more on the actual experiment on the bucardo. Overall I give the article 7 out of 10 stars.
I think this was an interesting article. It is complicated to think about cloning an animal. I wonder if they really could make a living, breathing animal that could live for a long time. Also, the article spoke about reversing the embryos from male to female in mice, but if they tried that in the bucardo, would it really work? The difference between male and female bucardos are very different than the difference between male and female mice. When we consider cloning the bucardo, it seems that the scientists are doing this as an experiment, but it would be very challenging to actually bring back a whole species. However, the scientists have spent 13 years trying to bring back one healthy bucardo, yet if they do not plan to renew the species, why did they spend so long making one? Also, liquid nitrogen seemed to have preserved Celia's cells pretty well, and it would be very useful to keep this in mind for other experiments. However, we don't quite know whether the nitrogen may have affected the cells a little. I wonder if the failure in the lungs of the first baby was a result of a malfunction in the cells, or if there was something wrong in the procedure. Overall, I think that this idea of bringing back an animal is intriguing but not necessarily important. After all, as Erica pointed out, it would be wiser if we could just learn from our mistakes.
I hope that they are able to bring a similar or almost exact replica of the bucardo and bring the dead species back to life. I mention similar because I was thinking that maybe the scientists could create a different species all together by mating the clone of Celia and another closely related species. They mention this idea and say that they could do this and then breed it so that it is more like a bucardo, but what if they don't breed it a certain way and just let it be what it would become. It might be a hybrid species, or it might end up being one of the two species that gave birth to the baby.
Also, I agree with what Erica said in the last part of her comment. We need to make sure that no more animals go extinct. We are spending all this money, time, and effort into bringing back a dead species when we wouldn't have to spend any of it if we just made sure it didn't go extinct in the first place.
Finally, I want to give this a rating 6 out of 10 because although the topic was good and the content was okay, but it could have supplied us with more information and could have been better overall.
While I find it amazing that we can now make extinct animals come back, I am not sure if this development is good or bad. I think in the case of some animals such as the bucardo, it is fine to bring them back to life. However, there are also many more dangerous animals that are extinct that could potentially be brought back to life. For example in the movie Jurassic Park, dinosaurs were brought back with terrible consequences. I'm not saying that the movie's sequence will be exactly repeated, but there could still be consequences. Consequences could occur for animals less dangerous than dinosaurs also. For example, the Carolina Parakeet is an extinct bird. But when it was still living, it was a menace to many farmers by destroying their crops and since it was rendered extinct in 1918, its extinction has not made a major impact on our environment. However, I also think that this development could be useful and that we should also perfect this technology so that if we ever need to use it then it will be available. If the time ever comes that an animal goes extinct and makes a big impact on our ecosystem (such as an overpopulation of another species), we can immediately put this technology into effect. In conclusion I think that this development in science is an intriguing one and should be worked on, but I also think that we should not hasten to use it.
I think that was inspiring. To think that we can clone extinct animals would be wonderful for future generations. I think that if we keep persevering we can conquer this challenge to bring back extinct animals.
I find that I agree with both Erica and Lilah that for dogs there were no problems, but have we tried breeding them now after evolution. We don't know for sure that nothing will happen to them anything is possible. As I am sure you know, some dogs are born without a leg or an ear, but does that mean that it was because their parents were related. If you think about it maybe it could have been an incident that could have caused having on leg. The mother could have run into something or the pup came out early. There is no way to tell if the same things happen to animals because we were not there. Overall I agree with both Lilah and Erica.
I have mixed feelings about this discovery. I don't know whether to be amazed that a group of people brought a species of extinct goat back to life or to be unhappy that someone would change the course of nature. So in other words, I agree with both Erica's point of view and Lilah's.
I have mixed feelings about this discovery. I don't know whether to be amazed that a group of people brought a species of extinct goat back to life or to be unhappy that someone would change the course of nature. So in other words, I agree with both Erica's point of view and Lilah's.
I am so surprised that scientists can clone another living species! I feel that Erica and Lilah are both correct in different ways. Erica is correct because of her metaphor of brother and sister humans and if they have children the baby will be defected. Also, Lilah is correct, although humans can be defected at birth animals can be defected sometimes. But overall I bet everybody can agree that this is an interesting topic!
The idea of cloning to me is a bit high-strung. But even so, I thought this was an awesome awesome article. Personally, I think that this event in 2003 should get way more attention considering it is the first de-extinction in history. Ive always heard of people talking about cloning, but this is different. Still seems kind of crazy that people are actually bringing an extinct animal back to its clutches and former glory as an endangered, not extinct however animal.
The idea of cloning to me is a bit high-strung. But even so, I thought this was an awesome awesome article. Personally, I think that this event in 2003 should get way more attention considering it is the first de-extinction in history. Ive always heard of people talking about cloning, but this is different. Still seems kind of crazy that people are actually bringing an extinct animal back to its clutches and former glory as an endangered, not extinct however animal.
The idea of cloning to me is a bit high-strung. But even so, I thought this was an awesome awesome article. Personally, I think that this event in 2003 should get way more attention considering it is the first de-extinction in history. Ive always heard of people talking about cloning, but this is different. Still seems kind of crazy that people are actually bringing an extinct animal back to its clutches and former glory as an endangered, not extinct however animal.
WOAH WOAH im sorry for that, I have no idea how that happened!
WOAH WOAH im sorry for that, I have no idea how that happened!
This was soo cool because the experiment was to clone an extinct animal. I think that that is a great idea because you can learn so much about life before us just from a small cell sample from the species. I think that Erica and Lilah both have very good points. It was interesting to read their comments and I loved reading about what they have to say. I learned a lot about this even thought the one that died was still a work in progress. I really enjoyed reading this article because it taught me so much about the bucardo. I really liked this article but I also agree with Lilah that the article should have been more straight forward they talked a lot about cloning other animals, and I found that a bit distracting. Overall I really like this idea and maybe someday we can make the bucardo come back out of extinction if we preserve them, and take care of them.
I enjoyed reading this article, but it was sad and now I really want the next attempt to be successful. Why would the lung have been punctured in the first place? If scientists are able to clone one bucardo, will they be able to have it mate with another goat species? If this works, than will the outcome have characteristics of only the bucardo even if it was selectively bred or be pure bucardo? Like always, there are going to be things that go wrong the first time, but we learn from them and we make it better each time even if it takes numerous tries. The next time if scientists try another attempt, they could try to make two, a male and a females. then they could either breed the two together, or breed them with a Spanish ibex or something of the sort. It's likely something will go wrong and it will become another failure, but that doesn't mean they should not keep trying. On the other hand as Erica pointed out, we should also try to make an effort to take action sooner, stop hunting of rare species, learn about more species before some of them go extinct and we'd never know it.
I really think this article was interesting and fun to read. Other than it getting off topic alot like Lilah said, I thought it was a well-written article. I would rate it an 3 out of 5 stars. This article also made an idea come into my head. If we have the DNA of the female bucardo Cilia, we could put that DNA into the egg of another goat that is closely-related to the bucardo, like they did a few years ago. The offspring was born but died a few minutes after birth and thus this experiment didn't succeed. I think the problem with the experiment was that because Cilia's DNA had been frozen for such a long time, one of the genes wasn't right somehow which cased the lung defect in the clone of Cilia. Overall, I thought this was a good article.
We have done a great deal of damage to our planet through over hunting and habitat destruction. We have driven many species to extinction. What if for the first time, technology could not only destroy life, but actually create it? Recently, scientists have discovered technology to clone animals. This technology sounds really great, but the long term effects may not so great. Once this technology becomes commercially available, who will get to use it? We can't stop people from using it once it becomes public for whatever purposes they want. Some people may want to use it for bringing extinct animals back to life, while others might use it for bringing people back to life or becoming almost immortal. Where would we draw the line? Well, there would be no more line, because anyone could bring dead people or extinct species back to life. One of the scary aspects of this is that we don't know how this would change the world. Bringing the extinct animals back to life might result in new diseases which would change the entire balance of the ecosystem. Another thing to consider is why we are bringing them back to life? Could a mammoth that lived during the Ice Age really survive in today's world? If the only place we can leave these animals is in zoo's, is it really right to bring them back? To sum up, cloning is one of those things that sound great, but may have some pretty serious consequences. We have done a great deal of damage to our planet through over hunting and habitat destruction. We have driven many species to extinction. What if for the first time, technology could not only destroy life, but actually create it? Recently, scientists have discovered technology to clone animals. This technology sounds really great, but the long term effects may not so great. Once this technology becomes commercially available, who will get to use it? We can't stop people from using it once it becomes public for whatever purposes they want. Some people may want to use it for bringing extinct animals back to life, while others might use it for bringing people back to life or becoming almost immortal. Where would we draw the line? Well, there would be no more line, because anyone could bring dead people or extinct species back to life. One of the scary aspects of this is that we don't know how this would change the world. Bringing the extinct animals back to life might result in new diseases which would change the entire balance of the ecosystem. Another thing to consider is why we are bringing them back to life? Could a mammoth that lived during the Ice Age really survive in today's world? If the only place we can leave these animals is in zoo's, is it really right to bring them back? To sum up, cloning is one of those things that sound great, but may have some pretty serious consequences.
I think that this article was very interesting. Firstly, I think that cloning will take a couple of generations to get an exact copy. I think that since Science has come so far in the field of cloning, they will figure a way to alter the gender of a clone. Also, I think that not all clones will be defected, only this one. One of the problems the scientists may encounter is that two clones that mate may not make a perfect "baby". In total, I give this article an eight of ten stars.
I guess I liked the idea of this article, but I'd have to agree with Clyde: you could look at this article and say that these people are ruining the course of nature by trying to recreate an animal that's extinct. It's nice to be able to remember and learn about extinct animals, but trying to clone them, I think, isn't really necessary. However, I did enjoy reading this article overall.
I read Yvette's comment and I think she proposed an excellent question. What if this technology becomes public and it gets into the wrong hands? As she said, people could use this technology to make themselves live longer, or bring people back from the dead, or a bunch of other crazy stuff that people never thought were possible! She also made another fantastic point. Why are we bringing these animals back from extinction anyways? Where would we keep them? What would we do with them? Could they even survive in our world today?
I've heard of cloning before, but I've never heard of cloning animals that were frozen in liquid nitrogen! This article is really interesting, and the things technology can do these days is just amazing. However, I'm not sure if it is exactly a great idea. It would be nice if we could bring an extinct species back, but something might go wrong. The idea is great, but the result might not turn out how you wished it did. Like Lilah said, I didn't like how the article went off topic a lot. I kept getting confused between what they were talking about. I also just wanted to really learn about the bucardo, so when they started throwing other things into the article, I couldn't focus on what I wanted to know more about. Overall I thought that it's really cool how scientists can do these kind of things, but at the same time dissappointed in what had happened to previous animals.
I think that this is a great idea. Since in the past there have been a lot of great creatures that have gone extinct. However the only problem is cloning an animal can lead to terrible side problems. In my opinion it is important to get the bugs out with non-extinct animals first so that when they try to clone an extinct animal it is not defective. Overall I think that cloning is a great idea that can really make an impact.
I think that the resurrection of a lost species is incredible. The breeding, in my opinion, should not produce any odd results. Though it is true that with brother and sister humans there is a 50% chance that they have the same mutation and will pass it on to their children, it is different with animals, as Lilah said. I did some research and the bucardo was a very interesting animal, and so is the fact that the scientists are trying to turn regular mountain goats into bucardos. So overall, I think this article was informative and interesting, but not really surprising
Cloning is a topic that I feel is overlooked. Bringing back animals that have become extinct so they can live on this world again is a great invention by scientists. The problem is, we can't quite get it to work. The article's example was about cloning an extinct animal called the bucardo. The bucardo is a mountain goat that went extinct in 2000. Although there is no general reason why they went extinct, it is believed that they could not compete for food with other animals, and there was poaching. By taking cells and nuclei, then freezing them in liquid nitrogen, they were able to preserve some of the bucardo. They then tended to these nuclei and mixed them in with goat eggs. One goat/bucardo was born, but died within the first few minutes because of a lung issue. In the article, they also discussed different ways to clone. My opinion is that if scientists continue to experiment different ways to clone, they will be able to find a way to bring back extinct animals. Besides extinct animals, they may also be able to bring back endangered animals too.
Post a Comment