I agree with both sides of the argument. In my opinion, there is so much wrong we have done to many species who are now extinct and we should some how right that wrong. However, de-extinction is trying to fix something that maybe can be done scientifically, but not morally. I believe to right this wrong our own species has done to this Earth is to protect what we have now and ensure it does not become extinct as well.

I believe that it's a great idea and a bad one.  It's great because scientists and other people really care about the extinct animals and want to do something to help them. Plus, like the article said, it's a really cool idea to see what animals would come back to life. On the other hand, it can be a bad idea because of the fact the the animals wouldn't be used to our enviornment. They would be in a new element and we don't even know what their elements were hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Wow! Organism revival! That sounds like something that could come right out of a Harry Potter novel! Bringing extinct organisms back into society sounds like a type of witchcraft! I love the possibility of the fact that organisms from long ago could live among us today! Science discoveries will definitely continue at a soaring rate and the people of today can become better educated on what organisms lived on the earth in the past. I'm all for increasing organism diversity and correcting the mistakes of the past pertaining to humanity causing certain species to become extinct. We would definitely have to prepare ourselves for these old species to live today because of the great change in environments between the two time periods.

I think that is fine.  If something dies it dies for a reason but if it can be benificial then there is no point of keeping it from being dead.  The only problem I see with this is that it would cost alot of money.  The only other problem is overpopulation. 

I believe that if humans have the ability to possibly revive an extinct species then we should definitely give it a try. I mean don't the extinct species deserve another chance since humans are almost always the ones responsible for their extinction. If de-extinction does not end up being beneficial to the environment then the practice could be stopped. I mean you never know how it will turn out until you give it a try. I mean I never new that my co-star Zach Galifianakis in The Campaign had a serious nut allergy until I "jokingly" put some walnuts in his breakfast burrito and almost killed him. We're all cool now... He doesn't know that I already knew about his allergy before the prank. Just remember that you never know how something will turn out until you test it out.

Greetings my friends!

In this argument, I used moral judgments to pick which side I agree with because I am a very moral person. I agree with the side that says we should not bring back extinct species. Though it feels as if mankind bringing back the extinct species from the dead is a way to correct the wrongdoing of our kind (since we are the cause of their extinction), it is actually doing more wrong to our planet. If we were to bring back extinct species back to life, our current ecosystems won’t be fit for their needs because these species roamed the Earth many years ago, and the Earth has changed since then. The Earth’s new ecosystems might make the extinct species uncomfortable, and if they are not able to adapt to their new environment, they will just become extinct again, thus adding more death on our hands and conscience. Plus, many other species today are endangered and are on the verge of becoming extinct. We need to correct the issues we are dealing with today before we try to work with issues from the past. These endangered species need our help right now; they are not just going to wait until we finish bringing back extinct species to life. By the time we finish resurrecting species from the dead, these endangered species will be extinct.

This is my personal opinion. Every one of my friends on this blog will either have the same opinion like me, or they will have an opinion that disagrees with mine. Either way I respect their opinion, even though I may not agree with them.

- Jane Austen

I believe that it would be facinating to see some of the extinct animals again today. However, we need to realize that the animals became extinct for a reason. That reason may not have been natural but most of them are. If someone would be role to fund this expiriment, then go right ahead. 

Yo I mean it sounds cool and all but when something's done, it's done. Just like rappers. When they time comes, they needa move on. It ain't cool if we be playin that "God" game because when the guy upstairs says he wants something gone, he got a reason. We don't needa be messin wid his plans, naw mean?

Really, I feel the topic of "de-extinction" is a strange one.  On one hand, you have the awesome-ologists that say, "Why don't you want to be able to see organisms that haven't existed on Earth for so many years?"  And, on the other hand, while I would like to see such an organism, I don't feel that humanity should use its resources on attempts to 'revive' dead species when they could be trying to protect the ones currently endangered.

...After all, we can't have baby Sions or Urgots running around the planet...

i believe that an extinct animals should stay extinct because they are extinct for a reason. If we brought back dodo birds they go right back to being extinct.