Dinosaur DNA

Now that we have blood cells and tissue, how long before the government tries a "jurassic park"?

I think, it is inevitable to see a dinosaur soon, and I'm going to be one in that zoo taking pictures and videos of these monsters. I can't wait to see that dinosaur!

And Vertu is going to be the first one eaten.

Originally posted by MAVERICK05
And Vertu is going to be the first one eaten.

Lmao Curiosity killed the cat.Seriously vertu you must not be a reptilian supporter all the time.

hey we could clon a dino, then take DNA from the dino and put them in people embryos!!! BRING ON THE DINO PEOPLE!!!!!

although you wud hav 2 travel 2 like botswana or some far off island where there are no laws preventing cloning and whatnot...........

Many of my friends and I have been talking about this. These are people whom I would consider perfectly normal, rational people, who 7 days of the week can tell you when something is a really bad idea. And without fail, every single one of them gets a look in their eye like a little kid on their way to McDonald's. "Oooo! I can't wait till they clone it!"

(shaking head sadly).

Did no one WATCH the movie!?!? They'll escape! They'll kill us all!
Nature killed off the Dinosaurs for a reason.

I tell them that, and for a moment, they look thoughtful, then their eyes glaze over, they go back to councing, clapping, and saying "Dinosaurs! Yay!"

God help us all.

no THANKS!! no dino cloning here!! i echo thelibra and say DID YOU NOT SEE THE MOVIE!!!

good lord!! no thanks!!

i have no desire to be chomped on by a veloicraptor. leave them dead where they are. they had their chance and lost it..........we don't need to bring them back.

but that's MY opinion!!


angie

There was no dinosaur dna recovered. What was recovered was a somewhat 'stable' goop made up of tissues that was able to retain some of the cellular structure to it. It is, after all, +65 million years old.

although they do say since they have found blood vessels and inner bone cells it is very likely that they will be able 2 extract dna

(when they get even a few cell they use an enzyme i think 2 reproduce them. they then revert the cell back to its base form, and this will in turn spawn into skin cells, eyelash cells, blood cells etc. Something like tht neway)

Theyd onli be able 2 do it with the trex stuff they found tho

Originally posted by Shadow88
although they do say since they have found blood vessels and inner bone cells it is very likely that they will be able 2 extract dna

In the article in Science? I haven't been able to get access to it yet, but from what I've been told, there is no likelyhood of that happening.

when they get even a few cell they use an enzyme i think 2 reproduce them. they then revert the cell back to its base form, and this will in turn spawn into skin cells

Having an enzyme isn't going to give them dna. They can 'work backwords' and make some reasonable suggestions as to what the sequencewas that was invovled in producing that enzyme, but there are other genes that influence protein production that they won't have any information about. They also can't reconstruct any cells or use them to clone new ones.

Just no raptors and t-rex's. (they'll probably clone em' and deploy them in Iraq if they even do it, and they'll probably make ONLY t-rex's and raptors)

Nature killed off the Dinosaurs for a reason.

Nature didn't really kill them... a really big rock did. its starting to look like it was actually a bunch of big rocks.. anyway if they hadnt been nuked this world would be ruled by bipedal intelligent dino's, not hairy smelly mammals

I think if by some chance they were able to recover enough material to duplicate, it would be a great achievement to modern medicine. Just engineer them all to grow half a meter tall and toothless. If Kernel Sanders can grow beakless chickens, we can grow toothless dinos!

Ive heard from man and ive seen numerious documentries that cloning a dinosaur is possible but very hard, very very hard. I mean alll that dna is there...but it breaks down over the years and is harder and harder to cloan with out just cloning a heart.... but this documentry also said that you can clone them but you just need to somehow recanfigure there d.n.a. ?? so i belive its possible in 10 or 15 years. After all the Japnesse are cloning a mamoth so i guess anything is possible. Another factor i would like to add is that the government could maybe use that d.n.a and mix it with humans to create a oh lets say "t-rex thats as smart as a human" then they could wipe out there enemys in jungles or deserts or wherever enviroment the rex is good in.

DNA tech just aint there yet for us to be fixing badly broken or damaged DNA strands. I mean were not even sure if we can clone a tasmanian tiger from a fetus that was preserved less then a hundered years ago because the DNA might have already been damaged. And that the blink of a eye compared to 65 million years

Im not saying its impossible but just not today with modern tech in 20-50 years who knows. Maybe then they will be able to reconstruct DNA from things we thought were useless today.

So I think we should try to preserve the best we can whatever we find for future generations.

i think people should concentrate on cloning themselves , i mean it'd be great if there were TWO of me in the world . seriously though , cloning dinosaurs is trouble with a capital T

Originally posted by apc
Nature didn't really kill them... a really big rock did. its starting to look like it was actually a bunch of big rocks.. anyway if they hadnt been nuked this world would be ruled by bipedal intelligent dino's, not hairy smelly mammals

While I agree with your assessment, no one is 100% certain of the meteor theory yet. And I'd still classify an E.L.E. meteor storm as "nature", unless it was artificially induced, which I doubt.

Though I think there is a credible amount of evidence to suggest that some dinosaurs could have evolved into intelligent beings, given a long enough timeframe, I'm not certain. After all, sharks, snakes, and alligators are all direct descendants of the same creatures living during (and I think even before) the Jurassic era, and they have yet to become as intelligent as humans.

Now, I'm not saying that humans are destined to rule the planet or any such arrogance, but rather that perhaps life forms had to become more complex than reptiles or fish in order to develope a genus that would be sentient. Mammals happened to be complex enough to give it a whirl.

Originally posted by apc
I think if by some chance they were able to recover enough material to duplicate, it would be a great achievement to modern medicine. Just engineer them all to grow half a meter tall and toothless. If Kernel Sanders can grow beakless chickens, we can grow toothless dinos!

Yeah, but, if modern medicine developed super-plague that could cross between multiple Phylum and wipe out all animal life on the planet, it'd be a huge achievement, but it doesn't mean they should, though. Also, the size that animals grow to is based less on genetics and more by environment, such as on the island of Flores, where the Hobbit was found, along with a tiny species of elephant, and huge species of rats.

Agreed that noone can really know for sure what happened to them, but I define nature as contained within our globe. Although the criteria of that very definition could easily be expanded. Example there is a huge buildup of pressure triggering a massive shifting of the plate California sits on. Millions die. This I consider nature doing what it's supposed to do, bring stability and balance by releaving pressure. I see a rock failing to do what 'nature' would prefer of it (entering orbit) as a completely external event. Personal preference I suppose.

I think all it would have taken to send a species down the path ending at our equal would have been the equivalent of a dino chimp. Something small, 2-4ft tall, already bipedal with fairly articulate "arm" limbs and fingers, and herbavoric. Can't start with a carnivore 'cus their small cunning brains have pretty much finished growing, very good hunters, but not very good at adapting.

However a transition to eating meat and becoming omnivoric like our ancestors would cause the resource demand for digestive organs to decrease, allowing more resources to go into development of the brain, an area with increasing demand to aid hunting. With these available resources and a new taste for blood, this lineage would have progressed over hundreds of thousands of years (or not, but become extinct and be succeeded by a parallel dino), increasing in intelligence until you get Littlefoot yielding a hatchet (or Ducky, if you're like that... ).

Stenonychosaurs is a good example. It is discussed here:
www.adelphiasophism.com...
However after some brief searching I can't find any other references to it, so it may not be a confirmed discovery of a new class.

Essentially project our evolution onto an appropriate dino species at the time and I see no reason beyond chance, or getting eaten, that that species could not have progressed.

... along with a tiny species of elephant...

Guinea Elephant!! I want one!

I too am a Libra... we shall rule the world! And then think of an excuse not to deal with it...

Originally posted by apc
Agreed that noone can really know for sure what happened to them, but I define nature as contained within our globe.

Ahhh... Gotcha. Yes, I can see where you're coming from: sort of like the Gaia. So what would be a good term then to describe an ELE meteor falling from space of it's own accord? I always considered it nature for lack of an additional term to describe things that happen without artificial intervention.

Originally posted by apc
I think all it would have taken to send a species down the path ending at our equal would have been the equivalent of a dino chimp...

...and becoming omnivoric...

Oh, I agree there. An omnivore would almost certainly be a good boost towards sentience on our planet, or a combination of food groups. I suppose a mineral or photosynthetic diet could enter into the food groups as well.

To expand on your idea: one of the requirements of one of the neccessary food groups would be the same type as the being to gain sentience. For instance, as humans, we are omnivores. Not only are we animals, but we eat animals as well. Even though eating human flesh is not exactly commonplace, that biological instinct of knowing our fellow man is also a predator designed to kill us, and us to kill them, demands for more advances in ways to protect against each other and kill. Were humans, say, plant and mineral eaters instead, I don't think we would have advanced nearly as far as we have, because we'd have so much less adversity against ourselves.

So, using this logic, if you had a planet where animal life never developed, and most plants were photosynthetic or parasitic plants, but one type of plant fed on other plants and minerals, with no photosynthesis, then in theory, the plants would continue to develop new ways of defense and attack. These methods would become more and more complex until eventually some sort of brainlike area would develop within in the plant to control these functions independantly of the instinctual level. Perhaps the fruit these plants bore would act as an array of brains (so the loss of one would not cause the plant to die), or perhaps it'd be an area in the trunk, where it could be more heavily protected by the plant's other defenses.

Since animal life would never have developed, there would be nothing to aeriate the soil (perhaps the justification for a plant needing to eat other plants, because of the lack of available soil). It would stand to reason that eventually plants would have to adapt ways to move to better soil or hunting grounds, requiring more brain activity. Since the intelligent plants could just as well feed off each other, eventually a concept of territory would be developed. Since territory would be hard to defend at first, perhaps the plants find a way to use teamwork as a defense, sharing the available resources and arriving at some sort of chemical understanding whereby the do not attack each other. This would now require any plants attacking that territory to develop tactics for attack, which requires new defenses, which require new attacks, until the plants reach the end of their physical capabilities, and perhaps the next evolution brings about the use of simple tools...

...and so on.

I have no idea how long a process like this would take, but it seems possible, if unlikely.

... along with a tiny species of elephant...

Guinea Elephant!! I want one!

I too am a Libra... we shall rule the world! And then think of an excuse not to deal with it...


I'd rather not have a guinea elephant. I'm more of a mammoth kinda guy... mammoths, with frickin' "laser beams" attached to their heads.

As for ruling the world, it's my goal eventually. Perhaps I can unite all Libras under one banner, and lead them into battle, using elephants and "laser beams" for the final battle.

Ahaha
Awesome!
I never thought about hyperevolved communicative plantlife. I never thought about a world with no animals... thats really cool.
Wow Im gonna have fun with this one...
I wonder how quickly they would evolve. If they were like a lot of our plants and still had to reproduce every year to continue, with the parent dying, thatd be fast.
Im brought to thoughts of what would happen if they became capable of space travel, even interstellar travel... would they even need ships or could they evolve methods of self propulsion... this is neat.

The Thing also comes to mind, hehe. the original

id just like to mention that velocie raptors are actually about 1 meter tall, and not the huge one in jurasic park. they are actually dinonicus(phonetic spelling)that are in jurrasic park