could jurassic park ever happen?

[blackhole123]

lets just say that someone found some intact dino DNA. would it be possible to clone one?

[Genecks]

They would need a species that can accept the DNA.

As far as I know, this would depend on type of dinosaur.

Finding an acceptor is not easy.

[Mokele]

Sure, in precisely the way that if we assume faster-than-light travel, interstellar travel becomes easy. While cloning has obstacles, the primary obstacle in any JP scenario is the source of dino DNA. Someone wittier than I said that it would be like buying a lot of steel wool in order to knit a Lambourgini.

 

Mokele

[Genecks]

I bet I could get the speed of light thing figured out before dinosaurs. You gigantic, annoying reptile!

I figure somewhere down the line, perhaps 20 years, someone will trip across something that would make the dino-cloning possible.

It's possible, but discovering the correct methods and techniques through research and development would take amounts of time. Sometimes one person beats the other to the punch. I mean, it all depends on how quick you think.

 

I suppose it's more rational than the faster-than-light belief at the moment. I think it's because of the atomic structure levels. Most people aren't too concerned with reviving dinosaurs at the moment. I'm sure some would be interested in a sci-fi type of splicing to increase human strength drastically with dinosaur DNA. However, such thoughts are highly far-fetched.

[ecoli]

I bet people would be more interested in dinosaur DNA to find out more about palentology. There are still gaps in our knowledge that dino DNA could potentially fix.

[Genecks]

That's right. I always forget about the ditch diggers.

 

The other aspect of bring a dino back to life would be comparing physiology and immunology with other species. I'm sure there are tons of things people are curious about. I think there could be enough reason to support bringing back a dinosaur. I'm still curious about how long a dinosaur could live, despite the theories and assumptions. However, something like Jurassic Park? The park setting would not exist. I'm sure people would set up different labs in different parts of the world to mess with the dinosaurs. As fun as it would be to watch a park full of dinosaurs terrorize each other, I don't think it would be reasonable. More harm than good could come.

[reor]

I think we've all learned from Jurrasic Park.

By the time that somebody finds usefull dino [acr=DeoxyriboNucleic Acid]DNA[/acr], genetic engineering will be advanced enough to accomplish such a task like modifying stem cells to complement and reproduce ancient nuclei. So, we just need to find usefull dino [acr=DeoxyriboNucleic Acid]DNA[/acr]. [acr=As Far As I Know]AFAIK[/acr] [acr=DeoxyriboNucleic Acid]DNA[/acr] that old is almost useless, even if "perfectly" preserved. It just doesn't hold that long.

 

EDIT: There was a mammoth found in the syberian ice, but no usefull [acr=DeoxyriboNucleic Acid]DNA[/acr] was found.

[Mokele]

The problem isn't the cloning technology or anything, it's the total lack of dinosaur DNA to clone from. Barring a time machine, there's just plain no way to get any, and if you have a time machine, you might as well just steal some eggs instead, because incubators are cheaper than genetics labs.

 

There was a mammoth found in the syberian ice, but no usefull DNA was found.

 

Actually, that's not true; we have extracted both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA of mammoths, neanderthals, anda handful of other extinct critters.

 

The trick is that all except the mammoth were from fossils less than 200,000 years old, and the mammoth was only possibly because it was frozen the entire time since it died. Even then, in all cases the DNA was badly degraded (thought it could still be peiced together). However, the chances of finding usable DNA in a non-frozen fossil over a few million years old is basically zero.

 

Mokele

[Sisyphus]

More harm than good could come.

 

Haha, I've long said the same thing about conventional zoos. I mean, what if somebody cuts the power!?

[CharonY]

Regarding DNA preservations, under permafrost conditions it has been estimated that DNA might be preserved up to 1 mio years (Journal of Human Evolution

Volume 45, Issue 3 , September 2003, Pages 203-217.)

 

Regarding the mammoth DNA, a metagenome approach was made yielding around 28 megabases, of which around half was found to be mammoth DNA (by comparing to elephant sequences). Note that the whole genome cannot be reconstructed with this method.

[SkepticLance]

It is seriously unlikely that we will ever get enough dinosaur DNA for a clone.

However, I see no reason why someone in the future could not design an imitation dinosaur. A lot of dinosaur DNA will still live on in dinosaur descendents (birds). It is not beyond our imagination to suggest that, in the future, the genetic differences required to create said dinosaur could not be designed 'from scratch' by our future gene science, probably aided by computers.

[Archeo]

lets just say that someone found some intact dino DNA. would it be possible to clone one?

I remember watching a video in which, a paleontologist said it would be possible in the next couple of decade, BUT it would be illegal/immoral/expensive. Basically, while it would be possible to 'bring back' extinct species, it would not be allowed. I don't know how valid the video was, but in my opinion it seemed legitimate enough (reported by a news company I had never heard of although I have heard a little since then, I would love to provide you with a link, but I can't remember the name of the video.)

[Ophiolite]

I would challenge the notion that this would be illegal. Perhaps, but no legislation springs to mind that would apply and I would be confident that there would be many countries in which it would not contravene any laws. Those members more familiar with regulations governing bioengineering can probably come in with a more informed view.

 

I would also challenge the notion of immorality. If anything a case can be made for it being a very moral act.

 

Expensive. Absolutely. But so is the large hadron collider.