Tuesday 19 March 2013

telomere

Biologists are at the verge of an important decision with technical hurdles toppled when it comes to the matter of de-extinctionNational Geographic covers this point of departure in a quite thoughtful manner, not dismissing the question of playing God, but positing that there is an ethical imperative to restore the individual species, and by extension the ecological diversity, that humans drove to extinction.
The dodo, passenger pigeon and even the woolly mammoth are poster-children representing many more creatures no longer around because of our activities, and scientists are quickly gaining the means to bring them back. What do you think? Are we obligated to make Nature whole again, or does our capacity to raise the dead cheapen our overall sense of stewardship and respect? Does Nature coldly absorb its losses quickly and move on, leaving no place for failed experiments? Our fault or not, since we are unable to operate outside of that broader context, should we be working to re-introduce some species? Ignoring individual ingenuity is something done at great peril and surely there is something to glean from every success and cul-de-sac. It was an unpopular argument when some ecologists advocated for a giant squid over a giant panda as a symbol for conservation efforts, since no one wants to lose the latter, but it was a judgement on our priorities.