| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1SamrinJan 18, 2011 13:08:54 | Japanese scientists are going to clone a Mammoth. They expect one in 5 years. Awesome. news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110117/wl_asia_af... |
| #2IdolisJan 18, 2011 13:21:23 | Hmmm, interesting. I wonder if they could do the same with smilodon or the dire wolf. I really enjoyed watching those shows on Discovery and Animal Planet. Maybe the short-faced bear can make a comeback too. Still, to be able to actually see a living mammoth would be awesome if they can keep it alive. |
| #3zombie_babiesJan 18, 2011 13:55:46 | I don't think reintroduction would be all that wonderful an idea. The world has changed ever so slightly since mammoths last walked it. It's simply not built to support them any longer. Less so to support gigantic predators. |
| #4homicidal_squirrelJan 18, 2011 14:28:06 | Momoths are alright. I want to see a T-Rex. |
| #5ADHadhJan 18, 2011 15:03:27 | I don't think reintroduction would be all that wonderful an idea. The world has changed ever so slightly since mammoths last walked it. It's simply not built to support them any longer. Less so to support gigantic predators. Yup, a few lab kept ones would be enough. |
| #6Mad_JackJan 18, 2011 15:46:20 | I saw this article earlier - like I said on the other site, when I win the lottery I'm gonna have them clone me one, then go hunt it with a sharp stick, eat me some mammoth steaks, dance around the fire wearing it's fur and then roll me some hand-carved mammoth-ivory scrimshaw dice... ![]() |
| #7Ragnar_LodbrokJan 18, 2011 16:58:19 |
My plans precisely. Now could you please get the **** out of my head? |
| #8Mad_JackJan 18, 2011 17:05:17 | My plans precisely. Now could you please get the **** out of my head? No. Finders keepers - they're my marbles now... ![]() |
| #9Ragnar_LodbrokJan 18, 2011 17:11:04 | Wait... I had marbles? |
| #10SamrinJan 18, 2011 19:25:49 | Mmm.... mammoth burgers. |
| #11grehnheweJan 18, 2011 19:26:25 | Cloned Mammoths? Mostly really cool, but also slighty disturbing. But I would also really like to try a Mammoth burger please. |
| #12ViolenceJackJan 19, 2011 5:13:01 | There's an SF novel that I read where they had colonized the moon and a couple planets, then some alien civilization with incredible technology scoured the earth clean of humans, established their own colony there and on Jupiter itself. We just kinda stayed clear of them, as there was literally nothing we could do about it. Well, up on the moon they had a few of the cloned dinosaurs, and a popular food was "brontosaurus burger." That touch was silly, but otherwise pretty dern good novel. |
| #13jesse.two.coinsJan 19, 2011 6:25:46 |
omg lol what was the name? |
| #14ViolenceJackJan 19, 2011 6:57:51 |
"The Golden Globe," by John Varley. |
| #15CCSJan 21, 2011 0:59:26 | Hmm. Sounds cool. But I'm betting that like nearly all stories involving clones this'll turn out badly in the end.... |
| #16ViolenceJackJan 21, 2011 23:39:01 | Hmm. Sounds cool. Well... it did have to do with clones, but mostly it was a former actor on the run for murder and his quest for identity. It was interesting enough, and the cloning of dinosaurs was just background stuff. It didn't really have anything to do with the storyline. Well... okay, nevermind. I'll say no more. It's no Jurassic Park, let's put it that way. The dinosaurs were not the important part of the story. |
| #17oxybeJan 22, 2011 12:01:06 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. and then i will be happy to finally have decent-sized portions of food. |
| #18SamrinJan 22, 2011 15:23:49 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. One can only hope. |
| #19Ragnar_LodbrokJan 22, 2011 19:33:13 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. Sounds like a good idea. I don't much like fast food though, so a real restauraunt would be preferred by me. |
| #20Plaguescarred1Jan 22, 2011 21:41:25 | Cloning a Mammoth ? Cool. I'd prefer a T-Rex, a real Brute but its a start. |
| #21SamrinJan 23, 2011 0:12:29 | Cloning a Mammoth ? Cool. I agree. Now go find them some DNA to use! |
| #22Plaguescarred1Jan 23, 2011 2:13:57 | The fossilized bones don't carry DNA ? ![]() (How did they get Mammoth one ?) |
| #23pluisjenJan 23, 2011 2:35:47 | Fossilized bones don't generally carry complete DNA as far as I know. They usually get complete DNA strains from creatures frozen whole, or from mosquitos that snacked on dinos and then got perfectly preserved in treesap, or other such rather rare finds. At least; that's what I know and remember about it. |
| #24Plaguescarred1Jan 23, 2011 3:09:13 | Ha okay, thanks Pluisjen ![]() |
| #25SamrinJan 23, 2011 7:27:32 | The got useable DNA from the frozen mammoth that they extracted in Siberia. It was 100% intact. |
| #26oxybeJan 23, 2011 10:58:11 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. yes but a fast food chain would allow them to cross-promote with an IP like once-mighty Flintstones. an actual restaurant, not so much. which is a shame, because i like restaurants over fast food too. |
| #27iqwinnJan 24, 2011 9:59:00 | Have none of these people read Jurassic Park? or seen the movie of the same name? or any of the sequels? This is clearly not a good idea. As for the Raelans, I don't look for a clone of Yah'shua any time soon. I'll look for His arrival as detailed in Acts 1 (fifth book of the New Testament, for those of you who don't know). |
| #28homicidal_squirrelJan 24, 2011 12:17:46 | Have none of these people read Jurassic Park? or seen the movie of the same name? or any of the sequels? This is clearly not a good idea. Movies are always making things seem worse than they really are. I'm sure you could get a Velociraptor as a pet. They would probably be very cuddly. |
| #29WolfLordBranJan 24, 2011 21:47:24 | "Awww... my velociraptor loves me! See, he's giving me hugs with those great big sickle-claws of his! Who's a good raptor... *disembowelment" As long as they include some sort of genetic failsafe in the dino's cloned DNA to prevent horrific rampages, I'm fine with everyone owning their own pet raptor. |
| #30bone_nagaJan 25, 2011 19:54:07 | Have none of these people read Jurassic Park? or seen the movie of the same name? or any of the sequels? This is clearly not a good idea. Well even if a computer programmer shuts down all the security systems in a failed attempt at corporate espionage, I can at least take comfort in the fact that the mammoth won't try to eat me. |
| #31jetshieldJan 25, 2011 21:08:01 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. |
| #32homicidal_squirrelJan 25, 2011 21:18:58 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. Trying to eat you would be a kindness compared to what it would try to do. |
| #33WolfLordBranJan 25, 2011 21:33:30 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. Gore you, trample you, pull you apart limb from limb in a elephantine fit of teenaged angst? Or worst of all, use you as an oversized Q-Tip to clean out its ears? |
| #34homicidal_squirrelJan 25, 2011 21:55:38 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. That's the worst thing you can think of? Innocent child, I will not be the one to corrupt you. |
| #35KlirshonJan 26, 2011 5:49:33 | Are you referring to that incident when the elephant seemingly attempted to sit upon a zoo keeper whose cranium ended up inside the elephant? |
| #36zombie_babiesJan 26, 2011 9:39:00 | A part of one would end up inside the other in his scenario, yes. You've just got who's in who backwards. |
| #37KlirshonJan 26, 2011 10:13:27 | After processing that informative response, I immediately deleted several files in my memory bank due to this exchange. My personal safety protocol will now automatically purge any data corrupted by "Mammoth Love". |
| #38Sheffields_ParkJan 26, 2011 18:51:11 | Fossilized bones don't generally carry complete DNA as far as I know. That's true. : P Add to that 65 million years (in the case of the oldest dinosaurs) of molecular decay. DNA on the outside of bone is hundreds of years old at the oldest. And inside of bone, some nucleotides can remain, but its severely fragmented. In the case of the Tyrannosaurus Rex bone where they thought they found DNA remnants and what they thought was collagen (a binding protein that holds various parts of the body together), it turned out to be slime and DNA fragments from bacteria that had seeped into the bone (the same for the red coloration inside). But even if it weren't, the fragments they found were still so broken up and decayed that there was nothing useful left of the DNA code. (As a piece of trivial knowledge, based on a misconstruction of the peer reviewed papers and a decades' long game of internet copy-and-paste "telephone"/"chinese whispers," its the same specimen that young earth creationists will tout as having been unfossilized, containing flecks of blood, and having had "fresh meat inside the bone"... even though the paper and examinations by experts said nothing of the sort.) They usually get complete DNA strains from creatures frozen whole Not necessarilly. You can get nuclear DNA (baring in mind that your cells' DNA is in the nucleus) from bones and teeth, or preserved hair or skin. If you don't have enough, or the nuclear DNA is contaminated, you can also get DNA from the mitochondria of your cells. We've done it with various neanderthal specimens, and to my knowledge, very few if any were frozen. However, frozen, as far as my understanding, doesn't hurt. : P or from mosquitos that snacked on dinos and then got perfectly preserved in treesap, Actually, you'd have assloads of contamination from the gut of the mosquito, as well as bacterial and viral DNA in said gut. The digestive enzymes would also have begun a process of deamination, where the body breaks down DNA, RNA, proteins, and other nucleotide sequences to build into more DNA, RNA, proteins, and other assorted nucleotide sequences. By the time the mosquito would have been preserved, the DNA would have been too severely broken up to use. Add to that 65 million years again for molecular breakdown, and you're in the same boat as leaving DNA samples out to dry for the same amount of time. See, as far as contamination the problem lies in the DNA amplification process called PCR (polymerase chain reaction). PCR uses a combination of heat and DNA polymerase to copy DNA to where you have enough to test or experiment with. The problem isn't so much the method itself, because its very, very accurate, but in that it amplifies contaminant DNA sequences too. To keep a long story from much longer, contaminant DNA in the samples can otherwise botch testing and experimentation by giving false results, or kill whatever it is you might be trying to clone. As a matter of fact, on my YouTube channel, I once did a video explaining this same problem with the cloning methods in Jurassic Park. : ) (Hey guys, long time no see. Been busy with the new girlfriend. Life is awesome. ![]() |
| #39homicidal_squirrelJan 26, 2011 21:56:35 | (Hey guys, long time no see. Been busy with the new girlfriend. Life is awesome. I was wondering where you had gone off to. Now if you could make your way over to the "Dude, you're related to her..." thread. |
| #40zombie_babiesJan 27, 2011 9:34:14 | Yeah, I was hopin' Sheff would pop into that one. |
| #42IdolisJan 18, 2011 13:21:23 | Hmmm, interesting. I wonder if they could do the same with smilodon or the dire wolf. I really enjoyed watching those shows on Discovery and Animal Planet. Maybe the short-faced bear can make a comeback too. Still, to be able to actually see a living mammoth would be awesome if they can keep it alive. |
| #43zombie_babiesJan 18, 2011 13:55:46 | I don't think reintroduction would be all that wonderful an idea. The world has changed ever so slightly since mammoths last walked it. It's simply not built to support them any longer. Less so to support gigantic predators. |
| #44homicidal_squirrelJan 18, 2011 14:28:06 | Momoths are alright. I want to see a T-Rex. |
| #45ADHadhJan 18, 2011 15:03:27 | I don't think reintroduction would be all that wonderful an idea. The world has changed ever so slightly since mammoths last walked it. It's simply not built to support them any longer. Less so to support gigantic predators. Yup, a few lab kept ones would be enough. |
| #46Mad_JackJan 18, 2011 15:46:20 | I saw this article earlier - like I said on the other site, when I win the lottery I'm gonna have them clone me one, then go hunt it with a sharp stick, eat me some mammoth steaks, dance around the fire wearing it's fur and then roll me some hand-carved mammoth-ivory scrimshaw dice... ![]() |
| #47Ragnar_LodbrokJan 18, 2011 16:58:19 |
My plans precisely. Now could you please get the **** out of my head? |
| #48Mad_JackJan 18, 2011 17:05:17 | My plans precisely. Now could you please get the **** out of my head? No. Finders keepers - they're my marbles now... ![]() |
| #49Ragnar_LodbrokJan 18, 2011 17:11:04 | Wait... I had marbles? |
| #50SamrinJan 18, 2011 19:25:49 | Mmm.... mammoth burgers. |
| #51grehnheweJan 18, 2011 19:26:25 | Cloned Mammoths? Mostly really cool, but also slighty disturbing. But I would also really like to try a Mammoth burger please. |
| #52ViolenceJackJan 19, 2011 5:13:01 | There's an SF novel that I read where they had colonized the moon and a couple planets, then some alien civilization with incredible technology scoured the earth clean of humans, established their own colony there and on Jupiter itself. We just kinda stayed clear of them, as there was literally nothing we could do about it. Well, up on the moon they had a few of the cloned dinosaurs, and a popular food was "brontosaurus burger." That touch was silly, but otherwise pretty dern good novel. |
| #53jesse.two.coinsJan 19, 2011 6:25:46 |
omg lol what was the name? |
| #54ViolenceJackJan 19, 2011 6:57:51 |
"The Golden Globe," by John Varley. |
| #55CCSJan 21, 2011 0:59:26 | Hmm. Sounds cool. But I'm betting that like nearly all stories involving clones this'll turn out badly in the end.... |
| #56ViolenceJackJan 21, 2011 23:39:01 | Hmm. Sounds cool. Well... it did have to do with clones, but mostly it was a former actor on the run for murder and his quest for identity. It was interesting enough, and the cloning of dinosaurs was just background stuff. It didn't really have anything to do with the storyline. Well... okay, nevermind. I'll say no more. It's no Jurassic Park, let's put it that way. The dinosaurs were not the important part of the story. |
| #57oxybeJan 22, 2011 12:01:06 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. and then i will be happy to finally have decent-sized portions of food. |
| #58SamrinJan 22, 2011 15:23:49 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. One can only hope. |
| #59Ragnar_LodbrokJan 22, 2011 19:33:13 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. Sounds like a good idea. I don't much like fast food though, so a real restauraunt would be preferred by me. |
| #60Plaguescarred1Jan 22, 2011 21:41:25 | Cloning a Mammoth ? Cool. I'd prefer a T-Rex, a real Brute but its a start. |
| #61SamrinJan 23, 2011 0:12:29 | Cloning a Mammoth ? Cool. I agree. Now go find them some DNA to use! |
| #62Plaguescarred1Jan 23, 2011 2:13:57 | The fossilized bones don't carry DNA ? ![]() (How did they get Mammoth one ?) |
| #63pluisjenJan 23, 2011 2:35:47 | Fossilized bones don't generally carry complete DNA as far as I know. They usually get complete DNA strains from creatures frozen whole, or from mosquitos that snacked on dinos and then got perfectly preserved in treesap, or other such rather rare finds. At least; that's what I know and remember about it. |
| #64Plaguescarred1Jan 23, 2011 3:09:13 | Ha okay, thanks Pluisjen ![]() |
| #65SamrinJan 23, 2011 7:27:32 | The got useable DNA from the frozen mammoth that they extracted in Siberia. It was 100% intact. |
| #66oxybeJan 23, 2011 10:58:11 | you do know this will eventually create a new fast food chain of called "Mammoth Burgers", where their small is someone's supersized. yes but a fast food chain would allow them to cross-promote with an IP like once-mighty Flintstones. an actual restaurant, not so much. which is a shame, because i like restaurants over fast food too. |
| #67iqwinnJan 24, 2011 9:59:00 | Have none of these people read Jurassic Park? or seen the movie of the same name? or any of the sequels? This is clearly not a good idea. As for the Raelans, I don't look for a clone of Yah'shua any time soon. I'll look for His arrival as detailed in Acts 1 (fifth book of the New Testament, for those of you who don't know). |
| #68homicidal_squirrelJan 24, 2011 12:17:46 | Have none of these people read Jurassic Park? or seen the movie of the same name? or any of the sequels? This is clearly not a good idea. Movies are always making things seem worse than they really are. I'm sure you could get a Velociraptor as a pet. They would probably be very cuddly. |
| #69WolfLordBranJan 24, 2011 21:47:24 | "Awww... my velociraptor loves me! See, he's giving me hugs with those great big sickle-claws of his! Who's a good raptor... *disembowelment" As long as they include some sort of genetic failsafe in the dino's cloned DNA to prevent horrific rampages, I'm fine with everyone owning their own pet raptor. |
| #70bone_nagaJan 25, 2011 19:54:07 | Have none of these people read Jurassic Park? or seen the movie of the same name? or any of the sequels? This is clearly not a good idea. Well even if a computer programmer shuts down all the security systems in a failed attempt at corporate espionage, I can at least take comfort in the fact that the mammoth won't try to eat me. |
| #71jetshieldJan 25, 2011 21:08:01 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. |
| #72homicidal_squirrelJan 25, 2011 21:18:58 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. Trying to eat you would be a kindness compared to what it would try to do. |
| #73WolfLordBranJan 25, 2011 21:33:30 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. Gore you, trample you, pull you apart limb from limb in a elephantine fit of teenaged angst? Or worst of all, use you as an oversized Q-Tip to clean out its ears? |
| #74homicidal_squirrelJan 25, 2011 21:55:38 | If it's a bull mammoth in musth it'll probably try to kill you, but at least it won't digest you. That's the worst thing you can think of? Innocent child, I will not be the one to corrupt you. |
| #75KlirshonJan 26, 2011 5:49:33 | Are you referring to that incident when the elephant seemingly attempted to sit upon a zoo keeper whose cranium ended up inside the elephant? |
| #76zombie_babiesJan 26, 2011 9:39:00 | A part of one would end up inside the other in his scenario, yes. You've just got who's in who backwards. |
| #77KlirshonJan 26, 2011 10:13:27 | After processing that informative response, I immediately deleted several files in my memory bank due to this exchange. My personal safety protocol will now automatically purge any data corrupted by "Mammoth Love". |
| #78Sheffields_ParkJan 26, 2011 18:51:11 | Fossilized bones don't generally carry complete DNA as far as I know. That's true. : P Add to that 65 million years (in the case of the oldest dinosaurs) of molecular decay. DNA on the outside of bone is hundreds of years old at the oldest. And inside of bone, some nucleotides can remain, but its severely fragmented. In the case of the Tyrannosaurus Rex bone where they thought they found DNA remnants and what they thought was collagen (a binding protein that holds various parts of the body together), it turned out to be slime and DNA fragments from bacteria that had seeped into the bone (the same for the red coloration inside). But even if it weren't, the fragments they found were still so broken up and decayed that there was nothing useful left of the DNA code. (As a piece of trivial knowledge, based on a misconstruction of the peer reviewed papers and a decades' long game of internet copy-and-paste "telephone"/"chinese whispers," its the same specimen that young earth creationists will tout as having been unfossilized, containing flecks of blood, and having had "fresh meat inside the bone"... even though the paper and examinations by experts said nothing of the sort.) They usually get complete DNA strains from creatures frozen whole Not necessarilly. You can get nuclear DNA (baring in mind that your cells' DNA is in the nucleus) from bones and teeth, or preserved hair or skin. If you don't have enough, or the nuclear DNA is contaminated, you can also get DNA from the mitochondria of your cells. We've done it with various neanderthal specimens, and to my knowledge, very few if any were frozen. However, frozen, as far as my understanding, doesn't hurt. : P or from mosquitos that snacked on dinos and then got perfectly preserved in treesap, Actually, you'd have assloads of contamination from the gut of the mosquito, as well as bacterial and viral DNA in said gut. The digestive enzymes would also have begun a process of deamination, where the body breaks down DNA, RNA, proteins, and other nucleotide sequences to build into more DNA, RNA, proteins, and other assorted nucleotide sequences. By the time the mosquito would have been preserved, the DNA would have been too severely broken up to use. Add to that 65 million years again for molecular breakdown, and you're in the same boat as leaving DNA samples out to dry for the same amount of time. See, as far as contamination the problem lies in the DNA amplification process called PCR (polymerase chain reaction). PCR uses a combination of heat and DNA polymerase to copy DNA to where you have enough to test or experiment with. The problem isn't so much the method itself, because its very, very accurate, but in that it amplifies contaminant DNA sequences too. To keep a long story from much longer, contaminant DNA in the samples can otherwise botch testing and experimentation by giving false results, or kill whatever it is you might be trying to clone. As a matter of fact, on my YouTube channel, I once did a video explaining this same problem with the cloning methods in Jurassic Park. : ) (Hey guys, long time no see. Been busy with the new girlfriend. Life is awesome. ![]() |
| #79homicidal_squirrelJan 26, 2011 21:56:35 | (Hey guys, long time no see. Been busy with the new girlfriend. Life is awesome. I was wondering where you had gone off to. Now if you could make your way over to the "Dude, you're related to her..." thread. |
| #80zombie_babiesJan 27, 2011 9:34:14 | Yeah, I was hopin' Sheff would pop into that one. |