# Wooly Mammoth blood found, fueling hopes of cloning the Ice Age animal



## Introvertebrate (May 30, 2013)

Russians find mammoth carcass with liquid blood:

http://www.newsday.com/news/world/russians-find-mammoth-carcass-with-liquid-blood-1.5370680

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Kazaam (May 30, 2013)

I sure hope that I will be able to ride a woolly mammoth before I die.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Malhavoc's (May 30, 2013)

Introvertebrate said:


> Russians find mammoth carcass with liquid blood:
> 
> http://www.newsday.com/news/world/russians-find-mammoth-carcass-with-liquid-blood-1.5370680


So Mammoth blood, the next enviro friendly anti freeze?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Formerphobe (May 30, 2013)

Great find!  Thanks for sharing.
But, we would want to clone them because?.?.?.


----------



## bugmankeith (May 31, 2013)

I hope to see them, the question is where on earth will they be able to live and what do they eat? Are any trees/grasses alive today that were millions of years ago?


----------



## Formerphobe (May 31, 2013)

bugmankeith said:


> where on earth will they be able to live and what do they eat? Are any trees/grasses alive today that were millions of years ago?


Exactly. Their world no longer exists.


----------



## Kazaam (May 31, 2013)

bugmankeith said:


> I hope to see them, the question is where on earth will they be able to live and what do they eat? Are any trees/grasses alive today that were millions of years ago?


In zoos, obviously.

Some of those grasses and trees do still exist, but I don't think that they're limited to only being able to eat those.


----------



## Munch (May 31, 2013)

How do they know they don't eat humans ?


----------



## ShredderEmp (May 31, 2013)

They know because we ate them.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Introvertebrate (May 31, 2013)

Formerphobe said:


> Great find!  Thanks for sharing.
> But, we would want to clone them because?.?.?.


You're not intrigued by the possibility of bringing back an extinct species?  I'm just sharing info.  I never said it was a practical thing to do.


----------



## JZC (May 31, 2013)

Amazing. Absolutely amazing


----------



## Shell (May 31, 2013)

Fascinating, I just wonder if we did manage to clone them, could they handle our climates? As Joyce said, their world just doesn't exist anymore, while they could live in it, would it be humane? Just thinking out loud really

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Formerphobe (May 31, 2013)

Introvertebrate said:


> You're not intrigued by the possibility of bringing back an extinct species?  I'm just sharing info.  I never said it was a practical thing to do.


I think it's absolutely fascinating that they found such a well-preserved specimen.  I would relish opportunity to see it myself.  It's right there on par with the finding of the Ice Man and some of the South American mummies.  I think it would be wrong to clone them, too.


----------



## The Snark (May 31, 2013)

So here mankind sits at the apex of the pyramid. Selectively taking what he wants from the environment and rapaciously destroying the habitats of any animal that gets in the way of his greed. Keystone will now be squirting the ancient ooze across the country for his additional profits and amusement. Science now tells us for our lifestyle to be maintained we need another half a planet of resources. The primary perpetrators of the rape and destruction get Fox as their only news source, vote anti intelligence whenever possible, vociferously object to anything remotely resembling spontaneous thinking and demand the newest and fanciest toys regardless what the planetary price may be.
Then along comes a Mammoth. It might be cloned. Well, natural selection has gone down the drains. Probably got the jump start when that planetoid whammed our ball of dirt some 65 million years back. But the mammoth was an herbivore. Not likely able to help put things right and give us the wake up call required. What we need is Jurrasic park full blown and not on some obscure island. Let's talk raptor seeding programs throughout the mid west. T Rex and friends bred like the cattle the glut demands on down Texas way. Would give the 'I need all the guns I can possibly get' crowd something to do.

Nope. Don't see the slightest problem with cloning. Honestly, anything that has the remotest possibility of helping keep homos erectus in check would be beneficial to the planet in the long run. Bring on the big woolys! Retrograde progress rules!


----------



## Formerphobe (May 31, 2013)

> But the mammoth was an herbivore. Not likely able to help put things right and give us the wake up call required. What we need is Jurrasic park full blown and not on some obscure island.


Ah, you're talking human population control.  That's a different can of worms.


----------



## The Snark (May 31, 2013)

Formerphobe said:


> Ah, you're talking human population control.  That's a different can of worms.


Naw. Nothing that complex. Just advocating something much of modern man has become allergic to: Socratic Methodology. Let's be honest, mammoth in your barn makes just as much sense as motorhome, ski boat, SUV, wide screen TV and the heck with don't drink our water or breathe our air.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ShredderEmp (May 31, 2013)

Snark, Homo erectus no longer exists. Haha. I wonder if the oxygen percentage would be able to support them today as it is much lower than what it was. 

Also, whos heard of that new virus? Apparently it could kill a lot of people.


----------



## The Snark (May 31, 2013)

ShredderEmp said:


> Snark, Homo erectus no longer exists.


Been in a Texas beer bar 22:00 Saturday night or wade through the outback 17:00 swill lately? Erectus is alive and well.


----------



## Munch (May 31, 2013)

How on Earth would they be able to clone it? Well it is Russia (no offense)


----------



## Malhavoc's (May 31, 2013)

Formerphobe said:


> Ah, you're talking human population control.  That's a different can of worms.


.... jurrasic worms?


----------



## Louise E. Rothstein (Jun 5, 2013)

Clone extinct animals?
People have tried to.
None have ever succeeded.

Perhaps somebody shall.

---------- Post added 06-05-2013 at 10:46 PM ----------

Human population control isn't ONE can of worms.
There are at least three "cans" involved:

The first "can" contains the word that we do breed too fast.

The second maintains that we are becoming infertile...people do say that.
Those people think we might wither away.

And now we see a new "can..."
And it is outrageous.

"Jurassic" worms?!?

We were not human then.
Nor monkeylike,for in Jurassic times we resembled rodents who climbed away from carnivores who "controlled" populations:

And who were not successful:
For THEY are extinct:

We're alive.

And we're here.

---------- Post added 06-05-2013 at 10:57 PM ----------

Even as I write we reveal far greater facility for imagining extinct animals alive than for returning them  to life.

We still wonder what will happen if they do come back to life.

And we wonder (As we have ALWAYS wondered)

Concerning what will happen to us.

With or without them.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## The Snark (Jun 5, 2013)

*Reply to L. E. R.*

Mankind's egotism is possibly the only thing greater than his penchant for stupidty.


----------



## Shrike (Jun 6, 2013)

Here's another interesting article from National Geographic on the topic of resurrecting extinct species:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/04/125-species-revival/zimmer-text

I can't wait to hunt saber toothed cats and thylacines from the back of a wooly mammoth, while massive clouds of passenger pigeons circle overhead.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## sugarsandz (Jun 7, 2013)

They'd find a way to turn cloning a mammoth into a reality t.v. show like everything else.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## ShredderEmp (Jun 7, 2013)

sugarsandz said:


> They'd find a way to turn cloning a mammoth into a reality t.v. show like everything else.


Name it, give it expensive clothes, feed it junk food haha.


----------



## Introvertebrate (Jun 7, 2013)

sugarsandz said:


> They'd find a way to turn cloning a mammoth into a reality t.v. show like everything else.


I want to see Snooki ride it.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Louise E. Rothstein (Jun 26, 2013)

Believe it or not-but,when I was a child,I was called "Snooki."

---------- Post added 06-26-2013 at 09:41 PM ----------

Mammoth rides,anyone?


----------



## Munch (Jun 30, 2013)

What would be the purpose of cloning a mammoth........turn it in to a reality t.v.show.Duh


----------



## Malhavoc's (Jul 1, 2013)

Any updates on this? was the blood found to be viable?


----------



## The Snark (Jul 2, 2013)

Munch said:


> What would be the purpose of cloning a mammoth........turn it in to a reality t.v.show.Duh


I this modern day with all it's industrial grade tweakiness who would notice a mammoth in your carport?


----------



## Akai (Jul 2, 2013)

To clone or not to clone....that is the question.  I think cloning should be a viable option if something today was on the verge of extinction but things from the past....especially from that long ago...they went extinct for a reason.  what purpose would we have to clone from an extinct animal other then a reality show?  lol


----------



## ~Abyss~ (Jul 2, 2013)

Akai said:


> To clone or not to clone....that is the question.  I think cloning should be a viable option if something today was on the verge of extinction but things from the past....especially from that long ago...they went extinct for a reason.  what purpose would we have to clone from an extinct animal other then a reality show?  lol


Science is about learning as much as possible, and what better to learn about genetics, cloning, and behavior of an extinct animal than cloning it. I see nothing wrong with it. It’s true that the world of that the mammoth once lived in is gone but it can be recreated to study this animal.


----------



## Louise E. Rothstein (Jul 3, 2013)

Arachnoking is right: mammoth habitat can be recreated.
When Sergey returned some surviving Ice Age herbivores to his experimental Siberian plot these creatures trampled the tundra moss out...and the grassland came back.
It came back because even "Ice Age" grasses tolerate more trampling than moss does;and it also became obvious in short order that these grasses are far more effectively fertilized by manure than moss.

The "world of the mammoth" DID come back on that plot.
And he saw how his returned Ice Age animals did help it happen.

"Reality TV?"

We could manage that much.
We can fake mammoths on accurate background.
If we cannot bring mammoths back we can manage that much.


----------



## sr20det510 (Jul 3, 2013)

bugmankeith said:


> I hope to see them, the question is where on earth will they be able to live and what do they eat? Are any trees/grasses alive today that were millions of years ago?


GMO!
Soybeans, corn, alfalfa!
Monsanto will figure something out, but then they might claim they own the mammoths.


----------



## Louise E. Rothstein (Jul 10, 2013)

Monsanto is not composed of mammoth fans.
The "mammoths" they do favor are "mammoth profits"
that are far removed from real mammoths.

Although the real mammoth fans have been unable to produce living mammoths they have been able to demonstrate that mammoth habitat CAN be restored-and that the Ice Age animals that survive CAN come back too... IF-and I have to emphasize that "if," humans can be prevented from exterminating them at a greater rate and with worse weapons than those that they employed the last time around.


----------



## Malhavoc's (Jul 10, 2013)

So again.. Was the blood found to be viable?


----------



## Introvertebrate (Feb 28, 2014)

*The Mammoth Cometh*



Malhavoc's said:


> So again.. Was the blood found to be viable?


It sure looks that way:

"Bringing extinct animals back to life is really happening.  The National Geographic Society hosted a conference to debate the scientific and ethical questions raised by the prospect of “de-extinction.” Brand and Phelan invited 36 of the world’s leading genetic engineers and biologists, among them.........Sergey Zimov, who has created an experimental preserve in Siberia called Pleistocene Park, which he hopes to populate with woolly mammoths."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/magazine/the-mammoth-cometh.html?_r=1


----------



## viper69 (Mar 1, 2014)

This couldn't be more wrong on so many different levels


----------



## cold blood (Mar 1, 2014)

viper69 said:


> This couldn't be more wrong on so many different levels


But it just might make a great movie!   lol


Has anyone thought of this?   I wonder what woolly mammoth tastes like?      mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm    mammoth!


----------



## viper69 (Mar 1, 2014)

cold blood said:


> But it just might make a great movie!   lol


They already made 3 of these movies with dinosaurs.


----------



## The Snark (Mar 1, 2014)

Staring vaguely in the general direction of the American mid west... Considering some of the ongoing procreation today, and lack of chlorine in the gene pool, wandering antiquated pachyderms are the least of our worries.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Malhavoc's (Mar 2, 2014)

That was an interesting article! thanks for the link A very good read.

 I do not know if the want or intentions of this is wrong in anyway, in truth as per the article they are not actually recreating or reviving any of the dead species, rather using genetic manipulation to recreate it from a cousin, or to make a cousin look and act like it, We are all for the progression of modern science, this is just one of the many gateways to understanding the building blocks of life.


----------



## viper69 (Mar 2, 2014)

This writer is irresponsible there is no true cloning going on. Novak sounds like the Rainman of the Passenger Pigeon too. The Fields Musuem prob gave him a sample because they were tired of hearing from him. And the MAGE inventor is irresponsible too all he wants is an elephant that can tolerate cooler temps--another example of arrogant scientists that make the rest in the scientific enterprise look bad in the public's eye.


----------



## The Snark (Mar 2, 2014)

Alrighty then. It's time I weigh in here with some serious incoherence. The dialogues at the beginning of Yerassick Park movie, pros and cons of cloning, are taken from real life, albeit twisted and garbled. Worth a rewatch. I heard those arguments over and over while working at Cal Tech in the life sciences department. The usual. Over zealous scientists not observing the disciplines as they attempt to take quantum leaps backwards and sideways. And of course, the Monsanto<TM> Imperative, PROFITS RULE! After all. $$$Money$$$ make$ the $cience go around - and buys the centrifuges.

Since I can be a top flight professional duhhhhh expert, I've sat on the side lines for years regarding this topic with a pretty objective point of view. Say they manage to clone a mammoth. So what? Or some velocoraptors. And say a long gone virus gets into the works that no immune system today has a clue how to resist. All sorts of tasty delicious horror scenarios. Love it. Bring it on!

Pretty rectal attitude, eh wot? Not really. The rectal attitude is in thinking homo sapien is the end all be all of the planet. We may, with enough twisted wanderings and billions of dollars manage to crank out a complete long gone gene sequence. Maybe. Meanwhile Mom Nature cranks out a few trillion each and every day. Naw. Quadrillion. Quintillion. Nope. Too restrictive. Make that every few seconds. 

The big big BIG HUGE concern is cranking out something that prekludes the continued existence of human beings. Mom Nature isn't anywhere near that selfish and self centered. Critters come and critters go, including the erectoid opposable thumbs crowd. The dance of life is infinite. Our tinkering with a few gene sequences probably won't even crank out a self respecting genetic bottleneck. It takes some pretty serious Toba style stuff to do that and even then Mom Nature just chuckles and shrugs. Chuckles, shrugs and gets on with what she does best. Probably thinking it's pretty egotistic of the frontal lobe-ites to even think they could upset her apple cart, especially when they have already taken their most precious resource she could give them, water, and turned it into a toxic waste dump.

It really doesn't sound like Mom Nature will shed a lot of tears if we manage to engineer ourselves out of the gene pool. As Carlin pointed out, maybe she wanted styrofoam. Job now done, we can phase ourselves out. And we are. They had to turn off the pollution sampling stations in several places in China as ... well, poison is poison. Why test the degree? And here we are, cranking out more Belushium 238.3 (half life a little longer than a few dozen generations can tolerate) while our Mickey Mouse money first nukleer resplatifiers screw up and barf their guts out every now and then. 

Naw. Mom Nature looks at the bigger picture. Her most advanced critter is extinctifying itself. But no big deal. She holds all the aces. All the cards in the deck to be honest. She can make more. And maybe she's pissed off about that damned comet and really wanted the fuzzy pachederms to romp a few million more years. Go for it gal. I love you anyway. Zap me out of your gene pool if you want. I also love your dance with Estelle, the cosmic whore. I'm dying with curiosity as to what will replace us!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## pyro fiend (Mar 3, 2014)

isnt this about a yr old story. if not older? i know the reason for doing it was to have "an extinct species in captivity" they planned on making the baby have babies n hopefully have it at 85%+ mammoth.. but if im not mistaken its like 10yrs for an elephant to mature.. so thatd be one heck of a project -.-  but las ti heard they believed the red fluid wasnt blood but something elese like muscles that where crystalized or somethign i dont remember history or discovery chanel did a show it it long ago.


----------



## cold blood (Mar 13, 2014)

viper69 said:


> They already made 3 of these movies with dinosaurs.


that was the joke viper


----------



## Galapoheros (Mar 13, 2014)

old thread but obviously still some interest.  Just one factor to consider when wondering whether they would survive today is "gravity".  I haven't heard much about it but I heard there was a study that concluded(the best it could be) that gravity on earth has increased over many 1000s of years, the reason stated I don't remember, if there even was one.  The claim is that an increase in gravity is the reason many organisms are smaller today compared to long ago.  Some scientists claim dinosaurs wouldn't be able to support their own weight due to their mass + bone structure/design and today's force of gravity.  If gravity is slowly increasing, I wonder why it is.  Has earth increased in mass more than we would guess?  Maybe it was really hammered by incoming space junk, more than guessed.


----------



## Malhavoc's (Mar 14, 2014)

Galapoheros said:


> old thread but obviously still some interest.  Just one factor to consider when wondering whether they would survive today is "gravity".  I haven't heard much about it but I heard there was a study that concluded(the best it could be) that gravity on earth has increased over many 1000s of years, the reason stated I don't remember, if there even was one.  The claim is that an increase in gravity is the reason many organisms are smaller today compared to long ago.  Some scientists claim dinosaurs wouldn't be able to support their own weight due to their mass + bone structure/design and today's force of gravity.  If gravity is slowly increasing, I wonder why it is.  Has earth increased in mass more than we would guess?  Maybe it was really hammered by incoming space junk, more than guessed.


If I recall the earth gains mass daily from space debri/dust, day to day its negligible but it may have some impact over millennia of time. I had though the reason for size difference was the oxygen levels in comparison then from now. Either way I am fascinated by this gene manipulation and look forward to some outcome from it.


----------



## pyro fiend (Mar 15, 2014)

Galapoheros said:


> old thread but obviously still some interest.  Just one factor to consider when wondering whether they would survive today is "gravity".  I haven't heard much about it but I heard there was a study that concluded(the best it could be) that gravity on earth has increased over many 1000s of years, the reason stated I don't remember, if there even was one.  The claim is that an increase in gravity is the reason many organisms are smaller today compared to long ago.  Some scientists claim dinosaurs wouldn't be able to support their own weight due to their mass + bone structure/design and today's force of gravity.  If gravity is slowly increasing, I wonder why it is.  Has earth increased in mass more than we would guess?  Maybe it was really hammered by incoming space junk, more than guessed.





Malhavoc's said:


> If I recall the earth gains mass daily from space debri/dust, day to day its negligible but it may have some impact over millennia of time. I had though the reason for size difference was the oxygen levels in comparison then from now. Either way I am fascinated by this gene manipulation and look forward to some outcome from it.




I think you both right actually oxegyn has depleted but also the space junk and hair skin particles etc can make up dust which technically is dirt in a way.. 

gravity does have an effect but i dont think so much on inverts its the oxygen.  But as for mamals.. theyd both effect the size. Infact im surprized eliphants havnt grown smaller because females in the wild get hip problems. Sometimes breaks fractures from the mass of the male mounting them (bet she wishes she could lay an egg)..thus living a shorter life then smaller similar species

buy also effect the birds after all dinos are birds ;p but a pterodactyl was huge. Tho now whats the biggest birds we have? Buzzards? eagles? if they weighed more ,like say obese, would they still fly properly? :think: 

Sent from my SCH-R530C using Tapatalk


----------

