The resurrection of the wooly mammoth feels both dystopian and unattainable. But that is what our current science is, producing dystopian-like research to find what seems like unattainable findings. It’s strange to think about. Which animal, who has been dead for thousands of years, gets the chance to come alive again-where do you draw the line? Is it unethical to release such a creature without knowing the implications it will have on our earth? While the resurrection will positively impact global warming, it will change the ecosystems and economics of the Siberian tundra forever. With all the unknowns, bringing back the wooly mammoth-or any extinct animal- is outside the ethics of scientific discovery.

— Audrey, Glenbard West High School

Although I am full of excitement and hope to see the resurrected ancient species, I think genetic engineering is still a field that has not seen it’s full potential yet, and such innovative milestone will gather more attention and fund to more of these genetic projects. But when will we know how to stop is the issue. How will be able to say resurrecting a mammoth is right, while designing a baby to eliminate congenital disease is unethical. What is the rules we have for the field of DNA modification. It’s best, I believe, to make proper rules even before this ancient beast is brought back to this world.

— Noah, Japan

[W]e can’t disregard the fact that this project, if it proves to be a success, would open up a gateway through our current bioethical barriers. What’s to stop someone from trying to replicate dead humans, when you could make the argument that it benefits us in some way? Animals go extinct for a reason, whether it be because they can’t adapt, or because they are wiped out by some natural disaster, and bringing them back into an entirely different world is unpredictable, and not worth the risks that it poses; not when there are other, more plausible solutions to the problem.

— Anna, Glenbard West High School

Assessing the Potential Dangers of Reintroducing Species

Scientists are only predicting and not analyzing what Wooly Mammoths could do for the environment. Because of how speculative it is, its potential dangers are almost innumerable. Take the Burmese Python as an example for invasive species. It was accidentally released into Florida and ran uncontrollably rampant all over the Everglades region, now threatening many of the local species. It is still a pressing issue today, showing how even with our technology, controlling disasters like these is near impossible.

— Gilbert, Kempner High School

Although there might be some short term benefit to nature, the true result is very unpredictable and won’t really go the way that the researchers expect it to go. In an ecosystem, each organism has its own niche or role, and is related to another organism in the food cycle, which is basically how the whole ecosystem regulates and maintains its structure. Any disruption to this food cycle, will just end up causing long term issues to the ecosystem, as it alter the lives of all the other organisms in a fashion that we cannot predict, as they will be exposed to this completely new creature.

— Loken, Farmington High School

In a sentence: Not Yet. Keeping personal beliefs on the morality and ethics of such efforts aside, let us consider the practical consequences of this issue. Potentially reintroducing a long-extinct species into our worldś current ecosystem would undoubtably impact all living organisms on earth in a manner we cannot predict. On one hand, it could be argued that the purpose of science is to continually expand our understanding of the world and whatś possible in it. Overall, giving back life to species is not a decision that can be taken back, Unless we have a solid reasoning for why genetically resurrecting species would be in our best interests, it would be better to wait. Jurassic Park said it best, ¨Just because we can, doesn´t mean we should¨.

— Ananya, Farmington High School

Focusing Our Efforts On the Here and Now

No, we should not bring animals back from extinction. We should be more focused on saving the ones about to go extinct rather than the ones that already are. Most animals went extinct because of climate change. Thanks to humans not working to correct the problem with climate change but making it worse, we are slowly killing everything and everyone. Those animals that have gone extinct have served their time and purpose on earth. Therefore, we should spend our time and resources focusing on those that are about to go extinct. We are about to lose Lemurs, polar bears, gorillas, etcetera. Humans should be figuring out a way to save their habitats, preserve their food sources, and do whatever else it takes to keep these animals, along with others from, becoming extinct.

— Tevana, Cary, NC