jurrasic park is frightning in the dark . All the dinosaurs are running wild! somebody let t rex out of his pen and I'm afraid those things will harm me cause they sure don't act like barney! oh no, oh no.
2007-05-10 07:55:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
With all the scientific advances in cloning and genetics it should theroetically be possible to create a living dinosaur sometime in the not to distant future. But even if they managed to create one i doubt they will be able to get it to live very long. We have still not figured out how to keep a great white shark alive in captivity for extended periods of time.
The climate is significantly different today then it was when dinosaurs were around. Earth no longer supports the majority of life and vegitation that dinosaurs lived on. There is no current social structure of these animals to integrate a baby with so it can learn all the things it would have normally learned.
Basically keeping one alive seems like a much more daunting task than creating an embryo using salvaged DNA
2007-05-10 08:09:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Matthew 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The things we have now were not dreamed of when I was a kid. Advances in technologies are tremendous. Bill Gates said in the early stages of his Microsoft Corporation that he couldn't see any reason anyone would ever need more than 64K Memory.
Yes, it will be possible to do as the book suggested. Crichton has always based his books on scientific fact mixed with foresight and development of future (or past) events. There have been recent advancements in cloning. Tremendous advancements in DNA mapping, and testing and so forth. I believe it is folly to pretend that this could not happen. It just won't happen at quite the same level of thinking we are at today.
You might enjoy this website: http://www.crichton-official.com/
2007-05-10 07:58:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by Pumken 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Like most Crighton books, it isn't that likely, but isn't that far-fetched either. We can clone sheep with no problem. There are problems with DNA found in amber that make it hard to reproduce or extract. So we aren't that far off, if someone wanted to dump a whole lot of money into developing it.
The theme Crighton is trying to teach in many of his books is that science should put some control on itself, and that just because science is capable of doing something great, time should be taken to figure out whether it will have a positive impact, and what the downside could be.
2007-05-10 07:56:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by wayfaroutthere 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Crichton is very good at making fantasy look like real science. No, it is highly unlikely, DNA does not preserve well, in fact it degrades very quickly. We are unlikely even to clone recently extinct animals with the genetic material left, let alone animals from millions of years ago.
Plus we'd need to find a vessel to grow them in. The books use a plastic egg environment trademarked "Millipore", but the film was using ostrich eggs to grow first-generation dinosaurs, at a success rate of about 1%.
Although tiny fragments of the protein collagen which extracted directly from a Tyrannosaurus fossil, changing many of our ideas about fossilisation, but protein is not DNA. Collagen is evidently very hardy, and can be compared to that of birds and crocodiles to give us an insight into evolution. Even if DNA had been found, which would have been immensly valuable to evolutionary scientists, it would probably not be complete and impossible to clone from. We would need it to be in a nucleus to transplant into a living ovum, but there are no living animals that could really bear such as organism, and the chances of failure are as close to 100% as makes no odds.
Even in the books and films, the DNA was not complete, which is why the missing data was filled in which that of birds, reptiles and amphibians. as Dr Alan Grant said at the beginning of Jurassic Park III: "What John Hammond and InGen did at Jurassic Park, is create genetically enginered theme park monsters. Nothing more... and nothing less..."
2007-05-11 08:19:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bullet Magnet 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is a kernel of fact in Crichton's book. The problem is that we get the dna in bits and pieces and often do not know which dinosaur it comes from unless it comes from a bone fragment. So We will probably not be able to assemble the pieces into a viable genome. If we can then perhaps.
2007-05-10 10:07:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jeff Sadler 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I even haven't any objections, yet bringing cut back returned dinosaurs would be now no longer attainable. The giant which would be cloned will basically be 50% giant and 50% modern-day-day elephant. in the adventure that they continuously clone and use the hybrids for gestation (it is going to pass from 50 to seventy 5 to 87.5 etc) and that they gets it just about to a hundred%. yet i understand that the dinosaurs is extremely now no longer waiting to be cloned as they haven't any close ancestors alive that this may be finished with. till cloning sooner or later won't require the egg of a residing animal.... besides I doubt there is any surviving DNA from dinosaurs it extremely isn't to any extent further fragmented.
2016-11-27 00:42:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
That's what I love about Michael Crichton's books. He makes everything so believable. He even has the scientific information that makes everything so real. It's like 90% science and factual information and then 10% fiction and fantasy.
2007-05-11 06:31:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by Becca 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes i am infact trying to help bring them back heres a secret they found a mamooth with hair and are creating a mamooth by putting the DNA in a elephant
2007-05-12 05:21:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by landenjms 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't believe that it's going to ever be possible to recover enough ancient DNA from any single species to recreate that species.
2007-05-10 07:46:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by hcbiochem 7
·
0⤊
0⤋