De-extinction: Revivalism Of Extinct Species

To comprehend how the revivalism of species concerns us in today’s day and age, it is key to get our head around the concept of extinction before all else. Extinction of a species is a term adapted to convey the idea of when the last living organism of a particular species perishes forever. On the contrary, revivalism, resurrection biology or quite simply de-extinction all allude to the idea of artificially creating an organism that resembles an already extinct species. Also, quite straightforwardly referred to as bringing a species ‘back to life’. Scientists are currently debating the most prevailing practical as well as ethical factors of resurrecting extinct animals such as the wooly mammoth, Tasmanian tiger or the passenger pigeon. There are plentiful assets and liabilities, opportunities and obstacles, strengths and shortcomings concerning this thesis. The idea of de-extinction could do wonders for modern medicine if researchers can overcome the hurdle of thorny ethical questions and pesky bumps in the road. This essay will explore the issue that revivalism of species is more thoroughly and with reference to both sides of the argument.

Revivalism of extinct species carries along hefty baggage of abundant dilemmas; thus, many question if it is adequate to focus our attention, resources, and funds on something so nugatory. After all, bringing back a handful of species does not atone for the thousands upon thousands that were driven to annihilation; one of the many consequences of human activity. It is surely more rational to invest the already limited resources into something a bit more urgent? Such as preventing extinction, rather than dreaming about a fanatical perception of a real-life Jurassic Park? Many diverse opinions regarding the issue of resurrection biology have circulated in the past decade or two as a result of a vast advance in biomedical science. The general vision of pseudo mammoths strolling around in a zoo may indeed provoke the public’s interest in conserving currently endangered species and taking initiative to look after the Earth and its inhabitants. But at what cost? Not only would this ambitious project entail an immense sum but even if it was remotely successful, scientists could not stop at just one or two creatures. It would be required to create and sustain at least one healthy-sized population. The fabricated species or hybrid would then have to be smoothly and effectively acquainted with their once natural environment. Seems reasonably doable right? Just shove a bunch of mutated and counterfeit beings into a natural scenery – even though they were conceived in a petri dish – and hope for the best? It might, however, not be as black and white as this. From monitoring the threat that drove them to extinction in the first place, to guaranteeing that they themselves don’t become a deadly hazard, let’s just say that researchers would have a lot on their plate to deal with regarding this phenomenon alone. And not to even mention the years upon years of sustaining, assessing and studying ahead.

Putting the negatives aside for a moment, raising extinct species from the grave could do us a lot of good. From new insights into evolution, to environmental advancements and most importantly; justice – the list stretches over acres of fields where mammoths once used to strive. For clarification, the goal of species resurrection is not to engineer flawless-looking duplicates of extinct organisms – yet to leverage the best of primaeval and man-made DNA. We could keep biodiversity alive, reinstate demolished ecosystems, and reverse the abuse that humans have caused. Truth is, humans have made a significant hole in nature over the past 10,000 years. Now that we have the ability, and possibly even the moral obligation to repair some of the damage – why shouldn’t we? Most of that we could do by expanding and protecting wildlands, by expanding and protecting the populations of endangered species. But what about the species that we have killed off completely – purely due to our childish carelessness. What if we could consider bringing them back to a world that yearns for them? The idea has potential and is worth discussing with an open mind. Especially if there is even the slightest possibility that it could reverse some of the more major damage that humankind has caused. Taking passenger pigeons as an example – who during the 19th century were the most abundant birds in America if not in the world – have been completely wiped out. Flocks containing millions upon millions who once darkened the sky and take hours to pass have vanished before our eyes. From billions to nothing. Seems unbelievable but humans still managed to hunt this keystone species to extinction in no time; thus, isn’t it only fair to at least give de-extinction a try? Scientists say that if the project can be conducted with the use of private funding in such a way that does not meddle with ongoing efforts to look after currently endangered species, then it causes no harm and could help our net biodiversity.