Scientists are capable of bringing extinct species back to life. Some people believe making species de-extinct is a good idea because it could be used for pharmaceutical purposes and provide real life examples of extinct species. However, bringing these extinct species back to life is really detrimental to the environment and the people in it because it’s a waste of time and money, it’s dangerous to pre-existing beings, and it’s not environmentally possible to achieve. The idea of bringing extinct species back to life is a poor idea. De-extinction is a waste of time and money because you have to put millions down to start the process and you might not succeed reproducing the animal for a long time. In text 4 it states “Spending millions of dollars trying to de-extinct a few species will not compensate for the thousands of populations and species that have been lost due to human activities, to say nothing of restoring the natural functions of their former habitats…”
…show more content…
In text 4 it states “Resurrected, previously benign organisms could become pests in new environments, might prove ideal reservoirs or vectors of nasty plagues, or might even harbor dangerous retroviruses in their genomes” (Lines 24-26). This means that scientists can revive extinct animals, but the animals or plants could do more harm than good and plague the native species of the area. Furthermore, any forms of archaic life being resurrected could only cause dilemmas to our current world. In text 4 it states “The disasters to be caused by climate change could be resolved in a few hundred thousand years; recovery from a sixth mass extinction could easily take five or ten million years” (Lines 38-40). In actuality, reviving animals is a terrible idea because people and animals in that ecosystems learn to live in their current environment. If animals came back to life, the species would be affected
In text 4 it states “Resurrected, previously benign organisms could become pests in new environments, might prove ideal reservoirs or vectors of nasty plagues, or might even harbor dangerous retroviruses in their genomes” (Lines 24-26). This means that scientists can revive extinct animals, but the animals or plants could do more harm than good and plague the native species of the area. Furthermore, any forms of archaic life being resurrected could only cause dilemmas to our current world. In text 4 it states “The disasters to be caused by climate change could be resolved in a few hundred thousand years; recovery from a sixth mass extinction could easily take five or ten million years” (Lines 38-40). In actuality, reviving animals is a terrible idea because people and animals in that ecosystems learn to live in their current environment. If animals came back to life, the species would be affected