Analyzing “The Case for De-Extinction” I have thoroughly analyzed the article titled ‘The Case for De-Extinction: Why We Should Bring Back the Woolly Mammoth’ by an American writer, Stewart Brand, at your request and I suggest that this article should be published in the opinion section of the Shorthorn newspaper. The author provides abundant evidences and reasons to justify his claims, as well as to prove himself credible and also evokes sentiments in his audience. Brand, in his article, describes the unique prospect of de-extinction, which will certainly excite, entertain and edify the UTA students, and most staffs and faculty members.
Brand’s purpose of writing the article is convey to the readers the idea that we can possibly bring some …show more content…
The public are concerned about the behavior of revived animals in the changed world. They argue that such animals could survive neither in hopelessly fragile nature nor in zoos. Conservationists, on other hand, worry about funding projects related to de-extinction. The author responds to this issue by asking how more than 35 million dollars spent on captive breeding would have drained other conservation projects. He shifts onto another thing the conservationists worry, i.e. the warning “EXTINCTION IS FOREVER!” [15] will lose its stings and sponsors will stop funding such projects. Brand acknowledges that the influential arguments against de-extinction are “the most technical ones, focused on extreme complexity of resurrecting extinct genomes”. [16] The author doubts the possibility of bringing back extinct animals to life as it has never been done before. However, he later revises that scientists have tried breeding Javan Batang cow with a domestic cow, and a chimeric duck with a chicken and one day the concept of de-extinction will turn it into reality. This will obviously allure interests of the Shorthorn readers as well as inform them about progress in genomic technology. UTA students will enjoy reading this …show more content…
Brand tries to entice the readers by stating “the pure thrill of the prospect of herds of mammoths bringing tusker wisdom back to the far north, or clouds of passenger pigeons once again darkening the sun”. [8] He effectively persuades the readers to imagine how it would feel like when the woolly mammoths and the passenger pigeons would beautify the world we are living today. At the end of the article, Brand predicts children growing up in such beautiful world might have an optimistic perspective towards the relation of humans with nature. This outpouring of emotion from the writer evokes a strong appeal on anyone who reads this article. Therefore, I believe that this article will definitely entertain the UTA students when they read it. Overall, Brand’s article “The Case for De-Extinction: Why We Should Bring Back Woolly Mammoth” is a well-written persuasive article suitable to be printed in The Shorthorn. The article being on a unique topic, will obviously entertain the UTA students as it has a lot to learn from. However, I would recommend some revision because the author uses some complex biological terminology and technical vocabulary which might not be convenient for all Shorthorn readers. Lastly, I urge you to publish this article on the Shorthorn
Brand’s purpose of writing the article is convey to the readers the idea that we can possibly bring some …show more content…
The public are concerned about the behavior of revived animals in the changed world. They argue that such animals could survive neither in hopelessly fragile nature nor in zoos. Conservationists, on other hand, worry about funding projects related to de-extinction. The author responds to this issue by asking how more than 35 million dollars spent on captive breeding would have drained other conservation projects. He shifts onto another thing the conservationists worry, i.e. the warning “EXTINCTION IS FOREVER!” [15] will lose its stings and sponsors will stop funding such projects. Brand acknowledges that the influential arguments against de-extinction are “the most technical ones, focused on extreme complexity of resurrecting extinct genomes”. [16] The author doubts the possibility of bringing back extinct animals to life as it has never been done before. However, he later revises that scientists have tried breeding Javan Batang cow with a domestic cow, and a chimeric duck with a chicken and one day the concept of de-extinction will turn it into reality. This will obviously allure interests of the Shorthorn readers as well as inform them about progress in genomic technology. UTA students will enjoy reading this …show more content…
Brand tries to entice the readers by stating “the pure thrill of the prospect of herds of mammoths bringing tusker wisdom back to the far north, or clouds of passenger pigeons once again darkening the sun”. [8] He effectively persuades the readers to imagine how it would feel like when the woolly mammoths and the passenger pigeons would beautify the world we are living today. At the end of the article, Brand predicts children growing up in such beautiful world might have an optimistic perspective towards the relation of humans with nature. This outpouring of emotion from the writer evokes a strong appeal on anyone who reads this article. Therefore, I believe that this article will definitely entertain the UTA students when they read it. Overall, Brand’s article “The Case for De-Extinction: Why We Should Bring Back Woolly Mammoth” is a well-written persuasive article suitable to be printed in The Shorthorn. The article being on a unique topic, will obviously entertain the UTA students as it has a lot to learn from. However, I would recommend some revision because the author uses some complex biological terminology and technical vocabulary which might not be convenient for all Shorthorn readers. Lastly, I urge you to publish this article on the Shorthorn