Bringing woolly mammoths back from extinction

As you may know, frozen woolly mammoths have been discovered in ice formations, more or less intact, since the 18th century.  So why not clone some, bringing them back from extinction?

A Russian university says scientists have discovered frozen woolly mammoth fragments that may contain living cells deep in Siberia, bringing closer the possibility of cloning the extinct animal.

The North-Eastern Federal University said in a statement on Tuesday that an international team had discovered mammoth hair, soft tissues and bone marrow at a depth of 328ft (100m) during a summer expedition.

Expedition chief Semyon Grigoryev said a group of Korean scientists with the team had set a goal of finding living cells in the hope of cloning a mammoth. Scientists have previously found bodies and fragments, but not living cells.

Grigoryev told online newspaper Vzglyad it would take months of lab research to determine whether they have indeed found the cells.

Woolly mammoths are thought to have died out 10,000 years ago.

via Woolly mammoth remains may contain living cells | Science | The Guardian.

Bringing back the mammoths.  Would that not be cool?

Royal blood for America

A vial of Ronald Reagan’s blood was going to be auctioned online.  After a time of outrage, the person who owned the vial–which was taken from the hospital that treated the president after the assassination attempt–had second thoughts and donated it to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation.

But, as Dana Milbank points out, that means that the blood is in conservative hands.  With the genetic material found in the blood, wouldn’t we be able to clone Ronald Reagan?

All Republican candidates, seemingly, present themselves as Reagan come back.  Why don’t we just take advantage of genetic engineering and come up with the real thing?

Milbank, a liberal, makes the case that today’s conservatives wouldn’t really want another Reagan, that the old one himself would prove too liberal by today’s standards, inasmuch as he occasionally raised taxes, passed environmental regulations, expanded Social Security and Medicare, and often compromised with Democrats.

I think the difference is that conservatives trusted Reagan when he found it necessary to do such things and they don’t trust anyone else.

I suspect it is true that character, let alone politics, is not exclusively in the genes, that it is shaped by life experiences and personal convictions.  But let us assume that by cloning Reagan’s blood, we could get another Reagan.  He would have to grow up first, of course, but in the meantime we could keep cloning so that we had a new version of the same man every eight years.

Such a mindset may account for the archaic notion of “royal blood”–the assumption that the son of a good ruler will be like his father, who, in a sense would still be present in the bloodline.  But cloning would allow us to make a new kind of royal blood.

We could make the Reagan clone a king, in this sense, or we could retain our republic and just vote in another of his clones every four years.  Or, to keep it fair and to keep democracy alive, we could also clone great Democrats.  I’m sure FDR’s hair is on some brush of his in some museum.

This would be the solution of the common complaint today that there are no great leaders today anymore.  We can just use modern technology to manufacture some.

Clone one for the Gipper? – The Washington Post.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X