this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
409 points (98.8% liked)

Not The Onion

13910 readers
605 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 85 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Can I be nit-picky here for a second?

If you're genetically modifying an elephant for cold tolerance and fur growth, you're not "bring a mammoth back from extinction", you're creating a furry elephant. It may look somewhat like a mammoth, but genetically it's not a mammoth at all.

It's like saying you can genetically modify a homo-sapien to have a pronounced brow ridge and a hairier back and say that you've brought the neandertal back from extinction. No you haven't, you've just designed a human who looks different.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 day ago

Well, the goal isn't to just create woolly mammoth-lile creatures by copying characteristics. The goal is to recreate the genome from what genome data we have into a living creature.

It's not like they are trying to create a sweded version, but take a creature that is already close and change the genes to match.

At least, that's how I understood it based on the article.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

And next you’ll say that genetically-modified ears aren’t enough to make catgirls real either 😩

Can we let this one go? Not for science, not for accuracy, but for the prospect of having catgirls in our lifetimes, at least?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

And catboys! We can be equal opportunity here.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Give me the genetherapy that makes me an anthropomorphic dog.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I wonder if the Lemmy liberals are going to call you a transphobic troll for this comment

[–] [email protected] 1 points 44 minutes ago

Are the Lemmy liberals in the room with us right now

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

I already have the hairy back, can I say I am half neanderthalensis? Better than homo sapiens seeing how things are going...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

That's not nit picky.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (4 children)

And the most annoying part is that this is incredibly fcking useless. Wooly mammoths went extinct for a reason. Large animals are becoming less and less evolutionary preferred. Wooly mammoths are adjusted for the cold while our globe is warming.

Can we just use our fcking resources for things that matter?????

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Can we just use our fcking resources for things that matter?????

Yeah, bring back the passenger pigeon! We need more pigeons! Do something that'll make a difference already!

Also, can we get some dodos up in here? Where all my dumb birds at?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Jokes on you, bringing back dodos is an objectively better idea 😎

[–] [email protected] 2 points 15 hours ago

Yeah, as I recall they're actually really important to the ecology of Madagascar. A native species of tree simply doesn't grow without them. And without those trees, well you can imagine that affects a lot of things.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nobody cares about wooly mammoths. This is a test of gene editing techniques that can eradicate genetic diseases.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 day ago

Then call it what it is

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You're using the same logic my dad uses to rail against going to Mars. He says there is no worthwhile reason to go there when more pressing matters on earth are in abundance.

Just like you, he is missing the forest for the trees, angrily ignorant to the fact that the knowledge you gained from trying to achieve a seemingly worthless achievement is the actual value, not in the achievement itself.

The achievement is just a convenient goal to make the science more exciting to the general public so as to garner more financial support from both private and government sources. Each of the steps needed to gain that achievement may not have gained as much funding as they do now if they were presented separately from that final goal.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

When your house is on fire you don't start looking for package holidays to Pompeii, no matter how much you might learn. We have all the knowledge we need to avert the climate crisis, we just need action and resources dedicated to fixing it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

You'll find that we have a lot of people on this planet, we can multitask. We can research genetic engineering, and green energy, and medical technology, and recycling processes, as well as things that don't advance those immediate goals, like microprocessors, meta materials, superconductors, astrophysics, geology, mathematics, etc.

When your house will be burning for the next few hundred years and you still have to live in it because even on fire it's the best house around, maybe just get on with your life and do something productive? Perhaps some of us can move out eventually, but it would take a lot of research in a lot of different fields, probably even genetics...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Something productive like finding a fire extinguisher, or productive like recreating fluffy elephants into an ecosystem that no longer exists?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Something like learning to make perfect custom designed edits to genes, such abilities could easily save hundreds of millions when the next major plague or crop blight hits. We'll definitely find ways to make hardier crops, that can survive harsher climates. Who knows, we could get so good at it that we could afford to just strengthen every species we can find with genes to help them survive the rapidly changing world, at least for long enough for us to turn things around. Maybe we could design lichens or mosses that could grow on Mars, adding oxygen to the atmosphere. Maybe we could learn to do even more impactful things that I can't even think of right now (since I'm not even a biologist).

And maybe, just maybe, genetics isn't even the only field that could turn out to be extraordinarily important to survival in the future. Maybe we should continue to pursue every field of science and engineering... Because fucking obviously we should.

So why mammoths? Why not? Bringing back the mammoth is just a bit of problem solving, it's an exercise with a tangible goal.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What do you want the geneticists to do? They are educated in their domain, you can't just plop them into another field

The applications of their work is likely plenty in medicine and bioengineering

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I want them to stop pretending that resurrecting a cold adapted species into an ecosystem that is rapidly melting will do anything productive.

If they want to be helpful they can work out how to engineer humans that can survive 40 degree heat and breathe co2.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

If they want to be helpful they can work out how to engineer humans that can survive 40 degree heat and breathe co2.

That's what they're fucking doing by bringing back the mammoth...

They'll run when they're ready, but right now they're learning to crawl. Or to put it differently, let them cook.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I was being sarcastic, I don't want bio-engineered humans adapted for extreme heat, I want us to not let our planet get to that point in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Well that's great and all, but what if that doesn't happen? Would you rather be dead or living comfortably in a warmer climate?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago

Drought resistant crops, heat resistant corals, and rot resistant bamboo, please.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 day ago

Dang I guess me and your father would rly vibe then because I feel the same about colonizing Mars

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Not really, we humans killed most big land animals that we found as we expanded our territory, back when we were hunters. This happened in big "islands" like Australia and Madagascar, as well as all the small islands. There, large animals had lived in equilibrium for centuries, and their extinction matches some short time after humans arrived. An exception are the galapago islands, as they were discovered in the 19th century.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

And to recreate the species they’d need hundreds of them from different genetic material. Which means they’ll likely create a single one that will eventually die and costed billions of dollars.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago

Besides the fact that the hunting hypothesis is that; a hypothesis, there's a lot of other factors as to why it isn't a good idea. Mainly, ohh idk... The fact that they have had no place in nature in over tens of thousands of years? Even if we managed to create an artificial habitat and role in an ecosystem for them, they would be very vulnerable due to megafauna's increased minimum land requirements because of their size and in danger constantly due to climate change.