Interesting… and raises ethical questions!!
- Thread starter sirhrmechanic
- Start date
Compared to animals, we have been playing god since we first set a broken bone, splinted it and cared for the person until they could walk again.
The question is when is it too far? If I understood correctly this was largely made possible by AI.
In my 62 years I have witnessed so much of science fiction become realty…..
In a genome of 3 billion base pairs, 1% is 30 million differences.
By their own accounting, the researchers changed 20 or so genes…
(For those not keeping score, the discussion has strayed into my very small area of competence…)
Oh great as if regular wolves aren’t causing enough problems.From Wikipedia because the news sources are sketchy:
“In April 2025, it was announced that Colossal Biosciences used cloning and gene-editing to birth three genetically modified wolf pups, six-month-old males Romulus and Remus and two-month-old female Khaleesi. In-house scientists at Colossal analyzed the dire wolf genome, extracted from two ancient samples – a 13,000-year-old tooth and a 72,000-year-old ear bone. After comparing the genomes of gray wolves and dire wolves to identify the genetic differences responsible for the dire wolf’s distinctive features, Colossal made edits to the genetic code of the gray wolf to replicate those traits. Domestic dogs were used as surrogate mothers for the pups.[115][116][117] Colossal claims that these minor genetic modifications effectively revive dire wolves as a species, though "no ancient dire wolf DNA was actually spliced into the gray wolf's genome".[115]
Overall, the work was less invasive than the typical cloning process. EPC cells were first isolated from gray wolf blood samples before scientists rewrote 14 key genes in the cell’s nucleus to express 20 traits claimed to represent the dire wolf phenotype. Colossal scientists produced 45 engineered ova, which developed into embryos and inserted into the wombs of two surrogate hound mixes. One embryo in each surrogate mother took hold, and Romulus and Remus were born in October 2024 after 65 days of gestation. The scheduled cesarean section procedure was repeated with a third surrogate, who birthed Khaleesi.“
Dire wolf - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
The gist is that an extinct species of wolf has been brought back… sort of. The Dire Wolf died out about 10,000 years ago.
Biogenetics firm has edited Gray Wolf DNA to supposedly match it to the Dire wolf and three pups have been born.
Jurassic Park stuff right here.
The science is interesting. But the ethical questions… well, read (don’t watch) Jurassic Park and realize that it’s also an ethical Pandora’s box.
Is this a great thing? We could bring back the passenger pigeon… the Mammoth and the sabertooth tiger! Even the Moa… for those who can’t figure out mils.
But should we? Do we need to replace the things we killed off before we were so enlightened and hunted them to extinction? Or did nature select them out for reasons other than Ug and Zog inventing the atlatl…
When do we start with the genetically edited human babies? Designer blonde blue-eyed Einstein’s…. Replicants with excellent “Tears in the rain” monologues? Or grown as sex slaves (because sex and porn are always the killer app/driver for new technology… really)
Personally, I’d love to adopt a sabertooth tiger! Can we order them soon?
No answers… just more questions than I can even think up. Just the sort of thing for the Pit to examine in our normal, rational and generally hilarious way.
Carry on!!!
Sirhr
I can guarantee they have already received about 20 calls today from some oil rich guys wanting to hunt them. Probably another 10 calls on wanting to purchase multiple pairs and have them delivered to their ranch to start a breeding program for future hunts.
What is the cutoff? That is my point, is it 21 genes? Or 21million genes? I have yet to see a non philosophical answer.
It's nifty what they are doing and this is a great way to get the ball rolling with the public. The ceo has stated each de-extinction is paired with a conservation effort. I think its red wolves in north Carolina?
Does it matter if it is a restoration,restomod, or original? When does it cross over to a real dire wolf? Or is it something completely new?
I kinda want a woolly mouse with tusks.
Let’s work on these while we are at it?
As for “philosophical arguments…” being applied to science? Tough historical call. Because philosophical arguments put Galileo under house arrest, held back learning for 500 years and gave us the Scopes monkey trial….
So on that front it is a fair argument t to keep philosophy out of scientific discovery.
But what does one say when it comes to the ethics and, yes, morality of scientific creations… not discoveries?
Can I set up a lab here at the Schloss and begin creating biological entities on a whim? To make whatever I wanted? Legally, I can’t build a Ghost gun or a sound moderator at this point t. But I could genetically engineer a 50 foot rattlesnake or clone Claudia Schiffer? Or bring back some ancient toxic plant? Or grow pesticide-resistant locusts because I wanted to?
Or maybe develop a fast-breeding locust that is only resistant to the pesticide I sell…. Because, hey, I’d get rich?
Philosophical discussions should happen regarding science. They can always be ignored…. But they should happen. Just like scientific discovery and scientific creation (generally called engineering) should happen. We need both, all the time.
Moral and ethical and philosophical discussions are the checks and balances in the runaway exploitation of everything… these days including (especially) genetics.
And is the whole reason for the thread (other than to see some funny responses —which is the point of the pit).
Sirhr
As for “philosophical arguments…” being applied to science? Tough historical call. Because philosophical arguments put Galileo under house arrest, held back learning for 500 years and gave us the Scopes monkey trial….
So on that front it is a fair argument t to keep philosophy out of scientific discovery.
But what does one say when it comes to the ethics and, yes, morality of scientific creations… not discoveries?
Can I set up a lab here at the Schloss and begin creating biological entities on a whim? To make whatever I wanted? Legally, I can’t build a Ghost gun or a sound moderator at this point t. But I could genetically engineer a 50 foot rattlesnake or clone Claudia Schiffer? Or bring back some ancient toxic plant? Or grow pesticide-resistant locusts because I wanted to?
Or maybe develop a fast-breeding locust that is only resistant to the pesticide I sell…. Because, hey, I’d get rich?
Philosophical discussions should happen regarding science. They can always be ignored…. But they should happen. Just like scientific discovery and scientific creation (generally called engineering) should happen. We need both, all the time.
Moral and ethical and philosophical discussions are the checks and balances in the runaway exploitation of everything… these days including (especially) genetics.
And is the whole reason for the thread (other than to see some funny responses —which is the point of the pit).
Sirhr
Or some spoiled little Veruca Salt that wants her own pet wolf, or maybe even velociraptor, instead of a golden ticket.
I am pretty sure that the discussion has already ready been had. The conclusion was to move it to other countries under false pretences. We know that there were over 30 biolabs in Ukraine but not a single bit of information has come out on what was going on in them. Let's not forget about Wuhan.
Dire wolves are actually not really closely related to wolves at all. They just look the same because they filled the same ecological niche, like most ice age mammals they were around the same size as current day creatures but more heavily built.
A genetically modified grey wolf is not a dire wolf.
A genetically modified grey wolf is not a dire wolf.
That IS what separates gray wolves from dire wolves. Did you listen to the podcast, or is everything you know about it from the press?
If anything needs to be brought back, its the likes of Sacagawea, (Shonshone tribe) or Noccalula, (Cherokee, tribe) to teach the so called American woman what real woman were once. Most men are real tied of all the fake shit that's been "bread" into 99% of them these days. One of the reasons most single,... thinking American men, are looking for Asian only now.
Future prediction: the dire wolf is featured in a rap video and quickly becomes a favorite for underground dogfighting and a status symbol of male strength. It is ultimately banned by most HOAs. After losing status as most violent pet, Pit Bulls form an alliance with other big dog breeds and start a canine holy war against the dire wolves. Chihuahuas still think they're the most badass four legged animal on the planet.
Meanwhile humans race to create a vaccine to fight the new wolf flu that resulted from a dire wolf eating bat poop in a puppy mill in China, or so they say.
Meanwhile humans race to create a vaccine to fight the new wolf flu that resulted from a dire wolf eating bat poop in a puppy mill in China, or so they say.
Clarification on my end, I was not commenting about "should this be going on" I was trying to determine what the cutoff for determining if a GMO dire wolf is a dire wolf.
The philosophical questions around the creation of the creatures is a really difficult to to answer.
the base of the issue as I see it is , we have been modifying living things for as long as people have been around. Plants and animals alike have been permanently and in some cases strangely changed. Is the laboratory just the scary part? Or if they had bred 20 generations of gey wolf to turn into direwolf like creatures would that be better?
Yup... there were no wild poodles or border collies or Great Danes... all created by mankind. From a base animal... given how long it's been going on... possibly dire wolves were among those animals! 10-12K years ago, we had proto cities and certainly civilizations...
Gregor Mendel only Proved what was going on. But "Artificial Selection" has been going on intentionally and unintentionally for almost as long as we have been the alpha species. Carl Sagan did a great segment on this in the brilliant 1980 Cosmos series...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heikegani
Definitely a good thing to throw into any arguments! What's the difference between gene splicing and someone breeding dozens of generations of dogs to create a Wiener-dog selected to catch rats! Guess one argument is that it takes time and contemplation (and a need?) to breed a wiener dog. But science can do it in weeks or months. Making it 'easy' to do. This was part of what many scientists warned about (and Crichton popularized)... was that the folks "Standing on the shoulders of giants" never went through the struggles, contemplation, effort, work and 'time to reflect' that their predecessors went through. They simply pick up a tool and say "Hey, I can use this to do X or Y." There is no reflection on the 'should' vs. the 'can.'
No easy answers... But the questions should be asked. Because the risks of some of this, long term, is apocalyptic. Or not?
We're still due a supervolcano, a massive bleed-out virus, or a giant meteor. So the cosmos is going to reset itself eventually. Maybe we should just concentrate on having fun, doing good works and trying to leave our little corner of the planet better than we found it.
Or, screw it! Let's shoot shit!
Cheers,
Sirhr
I'm all for it, full speed ahead!
Next I want to see Deinosuchus all over Florida. That place needs to get cleaned up.
The only "ethical" guardrail I see is that we need to have a strict prohibition on using it to bring back Russians after we finally get to the point of extinction.
Next I want to see Deinosuchus all over Florida. That place needs to get cleaned up.
The only "ethical" guardrail I see is that we need to have a strict prohibition on using it to bring back Russians after we finally get to the point of extinction.
Can we start with Palm Beach, Dade and Pinellas counties first?
Please?
Maybe, probably, the Keys also. Yeah, for sure, the Keys.
What’s the cutoff? Well, let’s think about it. And, let’s use the human/chimpanzee example. There’s roughly 1% variation between humans and chimps. What’s the variability between humans? SUBSTANTIALLY LESS than 1%.
That can almost certainly be extrapolated to wolves as well. What’s the variation within the grey wolf genome? How about the dire wolf genome? In both cases, the variation within a genome is substantially less than the variation between genomes. So, are the genomes of these pups (grey wolf + 20 changes) closer to grey wolf genomes, or dire wolf genomes (grey wolf + ~30 million changes)?
Yes, their outward appearance resembles the dire wolf archeological evidence. But, they are circus attractions. The physical embodiment of the “dinosaurs” (Dino-amphibian chimeras) from Jurassic Park.
Don’t let the hype and media fool you. This would be a very different discussion if the headline said “Scientists study ancient Dire Wolf DNA and use the discoveries to create a really big Grey Wolf.”
This is what they did, of course.
Except there’s no “lysine contingency. And, they’re not all female.
And, and, I’d bet dollars to donuts that these pups can breed with true grey wolves to create viable offspring.
Being kept at an undisclosed outdoor habitat? Hmm…
If i understand correctly you are going off of straight math to make your determination of "what it is". That is a simple and straightforward way of explaining it.
Do you think this is a starting point or proof of concept ? As time goes on they could slowly "improve" the dire wolf genome to make it closer to the extinct species? Or just stick with what works and go the restomod route?
It’s not just straight math. With 99% homology to chimpanzees, it is the differences that make us human. Could we make 20 or so changes to the chimpanzee genome and create a human? No. But, could we create a tall, hairless chimp, with low muscle tone? Yeah, I think we could.
As I said in my initial post, this is a headline grabbing experiment designed to source additional funding for the underlying research.
To the second question, scientists might be able to “restomod” ancient extinct species. Or, create chimeras with the physical characteristics of extinct species. Recently extinct species, where actual preserved tissue is available, might be able to be resurrected, but this tech does nothing for the underlying issues that cause extinctions (habitat loss, poaching, lack of genetic diversity, etc).
Sorry, no one’s going to ever see a herd of wooly mammoths roaming the steppes. Even if they can be resurrected, there’s just no place for them.
(As far as biological molecules go, DNA is pretty stable. But, it’s not that stable. A really good, fresh, DNA sample will have an average molecule length of greater than 50,000 base pairs. Samples that have been handled a bit, thawed a couple of times, and generally not been treated with kid gloves will have average molecule lengths from a few thousand up to about 20,000 base pairs in length, in my experience. “Ancient DNA,” where it can be sourced, will tend to have molecule lengths of just a few hundred base pairs. Why does this matter?
The shortest human chromosome has a length of about 48 million base pairs. And, genes are not placed “Willy nilly” on chromosomes. They have regulatory elements, transcription factors, elements that control RNA splicing, pseudo genes, duplications, etc. “Where” on the chromosome is almost as important as “what.”)
While the researchers might have been able to “sequence” the dire wolf genome, “assembly” is the real kicker. Their “genome map” is broken into thousands (tens of thousands?) of pieces, and contains gaps of missing data. They can use genomes of extant species {like the grey wolf} to infer how to piece together the dire wolf genome, but it’s an educated guess. If a grey wolf genome map exists, it is certainly fragmented into thousands of pieces itself…
As a further aside, the most contiguous human genome to date (the most studied species on earth) is fragmented into roughly 800 pieces. That’s about 40x more than the 23 chromosomes that we have.
Being back the aurouchs! I want a porterhouse the size of a manhole cover.
Again, you are all just commenting based on media stories without actually knowing what you are talking about. Listen to the guy running the company for an hour and a half, because they touch on everything.
Yes, if you put a hairy wig on an Indian elephant and giant plastic tusks then it might look like a Mammoth, but it isn't. There you go. If it is genetically identical or nearly identical (my point about genetic drift in the same species) to the extinct creature that roamed the earth then what exactly is your metric to say "It's not a "real" one." Appearently they're very close to Indian elephants and not so much to African elephants. They share way more genes with the Indian kind, and therefore it's a lot easier to replicate them using that as a base. If you had listened to the podcast you would know that they can alter one allele, or whole sections of the DNA at once to produce these creatures. Yes, they use existing animals that are similar to their goal as possible, but they are most definitely reproducing the entire necrotic DNA of their samples rather than altering a few characteristics of existing animals.
If DNA and natural growth of an organism don't make it "real", then what exactly IS your metric? You have to have a time machine? If some pocket of Wholly Mammoths were discovered today are they not real because it's not 12,000 years ago? If they're genetically identical to the lab grown ones and they can reproduce, again, by what metric are you saying they aren't "real".
I feel like I'm arguing with a bunch of stumps. Or maybe you just didn't listen to the guy running the company.
To the detractors, he unambiguously says that these are nuclear weapons they're researching. Bad people have nuclear weapons, and bad people will have this, because it's science, the way this reality operates, and you can't contain it because it IS. He makes a lot of sense to me, they have a ton of scientific oversite, and it seems like they're doing it right. You just can't stop it because it can be misused, because it will be, and we need to have it first and more so the bad people don't control it.
Disarming is always retarded.
They're not making a banana into a dire wolf. 20 positive genetic mutations over a couple of thousand years that increase survival (a blink in time) seems like a hell of a lot to me, but then they are canines with those slippery genes, so they evolve and can be bred very quickly compared to most other organisms, which is probably why they chose them as the first megafauna.
Chimps are more closely related to humans than grey wolves to dire wolves. So, 20 changes and we can make a chimp into a human?
My bet is they chose them because wolves are cute. Big fluffy white dogs. And Game of Thrones. Too bad Rob and John had such vanilla names. Also, just a few genes to confer the desired phenotype. (It appears that dog size is primarily controlled by just 3.)
I looked up the Aurochs mentioned above, and there have been attempts to recreate the phenotype. At the bottom of the wiki there is a great quote that encapsulates my view...
"Starting in 1996, Heck cattle were crossed with southern European cattle breeds such as Sayaguesa Cattle, Chianina and to a lesser extent Spanish Fighting Bulls in the hope of creating a more aurochs-like animal. The resulting crossbreeds are called Taurus cattle.[124] Other breeding-back projects are the Tauros Programme and the Uruz Project.[122] However, approaches aiming at breeding an aurochs-like phenotype do not equate to an aurochs-like genotype.[125]"
As to the question of "is it the same?" I would posit the following thought experiment. Could these chimeras breed with a hypothetical extant population of as yet undiscovered dire wolves to produce viable/fertile offspring? (This is the general question regarding speciation.)
Horses and zebras share similar levels of genetic homology as grey and dire wolves. (~98%).They can procreate but rarely produce fertile offspring.
These are wild animals and should not be kept in a fenced area and contained. They should be released into an environment to see if they can live and thrive on their own. Yellowstone is already dealing with the reintrodcution of wolves and the impacts are still being analyzed, so that is not an appropriate location for their introduction. Given the shifts in weather and global changes over the last 10,000 years, I would pinpoint somewhere around Hennepin Ave in Minneapolis as their original territory and the best place to reintroduce them into the wild.
good question. to me,the doings in a lab are the big problem. Mendel and Carver and many others going back millennia have been doing genetic work. that well before DNA,genetics were even imagined. dog breeds i am familiar with are essentially human creations-GSD,rott,dob,others. horses and cows & much more. the Spanish flu and ebola arose in nature. covid and the lethal vaccines related are pure human creations. i have no control of any of that but i just don't trust humans fooling around with direct genetic manipulation. a lot of motives are quite malignant. the question "can we do it"? is often asked. "should we do it" never asked or answered in my experience. rare times that it is asked,usually never answered or just carried on by human hubris.
...Like we don't have enough F'n critters out in the deep woods to eat our a$$es...
Mac
Mac
Last edited:
I was wondering where funding came from. There can't be any short term profit to be had, so who would invest? The guy said on Joe Rogan that he did get lots of strange phone calls, people with deep pockets that want one now.
Revelation 6:8, the rider of the pale horse is named Death, and Hades (the grave) follows him, with both being given power over a fourth of the earth to kill with sword, famine, plague, "and wild beasts"
Makes me wonder on that last part of the scripture because = Oh lets play God - unintended consequences.
Makes me wonder on that last part of the scripture because = Oh lets play God - unintended consequences.
I'm not gonna worry about the wild beast unless they cook up an Alien Queen. I'm more concerned with what is being cooked up in labs like Wuhan or the ones we don't know about.
