Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   myrmepropagandist (futurebird@sauropods.win)'s status on Saturday, 12-Apr-2025 20:16:56 JST myrmepropagandist

   I think if anyone wants to "bring back extinct organisms" they should start with an extinct lichen as proof of concept.

   What's that? You say you don't know of any extinct lichen? Well, that seems like a problem don't you think?

   What's that? You say you aren't even certain how many genomes you'd need to have the whole organism? Hmm. Maybe we should ponder this.

   Show me you can bring back a lichen first. Show me that you even *understand* the lichen.

   • Embed this notice
     myrmepropagandist (futurebird@sauropods.win)'s status on Saturday, 12-Apr-2025 20:16:52 JST myrmepropagandist

     in reply to

     • Keith Wansbrough

     @kw217

     Exactly. And to be more serious about this? It scares me that people might think that just saving DNA is anything close to preserving creatures in context, preserving the fragile beautiful ecosystems that we are destroying before we even look at them closely enough to know them.

     I'm concerned that the *language* of necromancy we are using around this technology is leaving people with the incorrect impression. Enabling more environmental destruction. Could that even be the goal?

   • Embed this notice
     Keith Wansbrough (kw217@mathstodon.xyz)'s status on Saturday, 12-Apr-2025 20:16:53 JST Keith Wansbrough

     in reply to

     @futurebird like the hippo and its gut bacteria

     Rich Felker repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     myrmepropagandist (futurebird@sauropods.win)'s status on Saturday, 12-Apr-2025 20:16:55 JST myrmepropagandist

     in reply to

     In lichen the interplay between genomes of distinct families of organisms is more obvious, and you can't just have the algae or the fungi and say you have the whole organism.

     But this interplay exists at various levels for all living things.