Should we bring back extinct animals

A couple articles got me thinking

http://www.businessinsider.com/24-animals-for-de-extinction-2013-3#

and

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/frog-gives-birth-mouth-brought-back-extinction-100306453--abc-news-tech.html

Personally I have mixed feelings about this. If scientists succeed at bringing these animals back will they be able to re create viable self sustaining populations capable of surviving in current eco systems are they just doing it to show they can?

One argument is they failed to adapt to their environments and if brought back will only go extinct again.

This is partially true. The dinosaurs went extinct very suddenly but it was due to a cataclysmic asteroid or comet impact and while technically they failed to adapt to the conditions that followed it wasn't in the sense by which most of these other animals went extinct.

There is no doubt humans caused some of the listed animals to go extinct (and lots of others too) but some we will argue we are part of the eco system and evolved to have the impact we do. If so then why is it so horrible when humans die, especially from non natural causes?

Finally I have to feel that with so many living species currently on the brink of extinction due to human activity it shows what a poor job we do of interacting with other forms of life and how poorly we treat our planet. Based on that I'm wondering if bringing back extinct species is such a good thing.

For a zoo maybe, though tbh, imo zoos are cruel. It would be valuable to get knowledge but they are extinct for a reason. I wouldn't let them free.

The best candidate for resurrection is the Tasmanian Tiger, because it's only been extinct for a century and the conditions haven't changed much since its extinction. It would also have a much smaller footprint than "cooler" extinct animals (mammoths or big dinosaurs.)

No.

We humans mess with nature and create horrible conditions as we continue to hunt/kill off endangered species. Think how much more we'd f*** up the world if we started doing things like bringing naturally extinct animals to life. Does what they used to eat still exist, for example? Or, oh wait, there are strip malls located in every patch of where they used to live.

Just because we can doesn't mean we should.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
No.

We humans mess with nature and create horrible conditions as we continue to hunt/kill off endangered species. Think how much more we'd f*** up the world if we started doing things like bringing naturally extinct animals to life. Does what they used to eat still exist, for example? Or, oh wait, there are strip malls located in every patch of where they used to live.

Just because we can doesn't mean we should.

They covered this in a TED talk last week.

YouTube video

I'd much prefer scientist work on hybrid animals, better suited to exist in future environments. Polar bear/rat.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
No.

We humans mess with nature and create horrible conditions as we continue to hunt/kill off endangered species. Think how much more we'd f*** up the world if we started doing things like bringing naturally extinct animals to life. Does what they used to eat still exist, for example? Or, oh wait, there are strip malls located in every patch of where they used to live.

Just because we can doesn't mean we should.

What about near extinct species like whales?

Originally posted by Robtard
I'd much prefer scientist work on hybrid animals, better suited to exist in future environments. Polar bear/rat.

I'm all for cross genetics. AS LONG AS THEY AREN'T RATS!

Rats are one of natures best survivors.

We should bring them back.

And then hunt them into extinction in some big ass park. Then bring them back again.

Dat revenue.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
The best candidate for resurrection is the Tasmanian Tiger, because it's only been extinct for a century and the conditions haven't changed much since its extinction. It would also have a much smaller footprint than "cooler" extinct animals (mammoths or big dinosaurs.)

There's amateur footage from a few years back allegedly depicting a Tasmanian Tiger in the wild and there are people who believe there's a tiny population of the animals sill in existence.

Originally posted by Robtard
There's footage from a few years back allegedly depicting a Tasmanian Tiger in the wild and there are people who believe there's a tiny population of the animals sill in existence.

Originally posted by Astner
With that line of reasoning we should also clone Nessie.

/derp

sabertooth and mastodon.

&

?

Originally posted by Astner
With that line of reasoning we should also clone Nessie.

That would be awesome.

we should focus more on preserving species we're driving into extinction. but at the rate we're going i say screw it. make a t-rex.

Originally posted by Astner
First and foremost you need to get the dose of preserved DNA. Secondly, you need to find a mammal that can breed with the Tasmanian Tiger and produce a fertile offspring for the womb.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
we should focus more on preserving species we're driving into extinction. but at the rate we're going i say screw it. make a t-rex.

Realistically, cloning dinos would be great. They'd find a way to go on a rampage, reduce the population of people to a sustainable number, etc, etc.

It's all gravy as long as we can pick and choose who gets eaten. There are a number of congressional officials who would make great snacks right about now.