A real Jurassic park

Science discussion. Easy to follow, no?

Moderator: ratattuta

A real Jurassic park

Unread postby zephyr » Mon, 17th Aug 2009 10:06

My question here today is, "Is it possible to make a REAL Jurassic park?
Well I think so, maybe not huge dino's but smaller, we are studying stem cell research, and also cloning, yes it is true, I've researched it, and actually got the chance to talk to a scientist, one of the things I heard from him was a scientist helped a 72 year old women have a baby, by using cloning and stem cell research technology.
If we could some how replace human DNA with dinosaur DNA, and did some tweaks and so on and so forth, I think its very possible. :pleased:

SOMEONE CALL JOHN HAMMAND! NOWW!! :x3: :x3:

Give me your thoughts on this post, and if its possible to make a REAL Jurassic park!
Image
User avatar
zephyr
Park Visitor
Park Visitor
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue, 11th Aug 2009 20:44
Gender: Male
User Title: Ultimate Video Game nerd.

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Kovu » Mon, 17th Aug 2009 12:12

Possible? Some time in the future, yes. But should it be done? No. We should take care of todays ecosystems instead of reintroducing completely foreign organisms, which will destroy them even more.

Further, no matter how you do it... these 'Dinosaurs' won't represent the real, mesozoic species. They will be mutants designed by man. As much as I like dinosaurs, I'm against it. And I wish homo sapiens would invest more in conservation of natural environments and its inhabitants...
Image
User avatar
Kovu
Park Admin
Park Admin
 
Posts: 2373
Joined: Fri, 5th Jan 2007 23:44
Location: on top of the foodchain...
Gender: Male
User Title: Voilà le tigre!

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Guitar_Guy » Mon, 17th Aug 2009 21:18

Short Story: Unless someone can go back in time and take dinosaurs from their natural habitat, assuming that the repercussions of said event do not completely alter time, it is not possible, especially in the case of Jurassic Park.

Long Story: Jurassic Park centers on the hypothesis that DNA can be obtained from fossils and then used to clone dinosaurs, however, the are numerous problems with this theory first and foremost being the acquisition of DNA. Bones most of the time are too old to contain any more DNA. The ones that do have DNA, have such sparse amounts that there is no way that one could ever obtain enough fossils to compensate because such an amount does not exist do to the rare series of events that MUST occur for a fossil to form. The other method suggested was the acquisition of DNA from amber, however, just like in the game, no one knows what DNA the amber contains, and, again, it is too tiny of an amount to create a dinosaur. These amounts are so tiny that it would be like getting one or two words, maybe a sentence if you're lucky, from "War and Peace" and trying to figure out the whole book. Also, they suggested using DNA from a frog to make up for the holes in the code. The result would be that the dino, assuming it lived, would more likely be a mutant frog and would die very soon due to the fact that its body would not function right. Think modifying game code but adding extra spaces and deleting parts of it, BOOM, game crashes. Also, if you read "Jurassic Park: The Lost World" it said that because the dinos do not have PROPER parents, they would not act as they would have millions of years ago. For example, the raptors in the book had a very crude social structure because they didn't grow up with one in place and were not taught it. Imagine taking care of yourself in the wild from birth with only your brothers and sisters to help you and no parents. So that rules out Jurassic Park's theories.

Modern technology has proposed a new theory called retro evolution. This entails taking dinosaurs modern day form (birds) and reverting them back to dinosaur-like creatures by giving them protein "signals" while they are still forming. When you look at the embryology of birds, you find that the bird actually somewhat resembles a dino. Notice the many vertebrae in the tail. Someone also suggested that teeth could be formed. In theory, if this was done to a bird like an emu for many years, we might get a dinosaur-like creature over time. However, it would never truly be a dinosaur. Also, so far, as with regular cloning, the chances for success are slim to none, think one in thousands of trials (it took 10 years to produce Dolly, the first cloned sheep). So, like I said, there will probably be no future Jurassic Park. In the words of Dr. Alan Grant "Dinosaurs died 65 million years ago, what is left of them is fossilized in rock, and it is in the rock that real scientists make real discoveries."
Last edited by Guitar_Guy on Tue, 18th Aug 2009 2:24, edited 1 time in total.
Image
"You have to go on and be crazy. Craziness is like heaven" - Jimi Hendrix
Fight Spam Here!
User avatar
Guitar_Guy
Predator
Predator
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon, 10th Aug 2009 18:12
Location: United States - Indiana
Gender: Male
User Title: GG, Moses

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby zephyr » Mon, 17th Aug 2009 23:34

Very true, but if we took the scientific studies of what the books says, like when they use frog DNA. Just a thought, But we arent leaving this earth for a while so you never know, I just hope I get to hear about something before I die xD.
Image
User avatar
zephyr
Park Visitor
Park Visitor
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue, 11th Aug 2009 20:44
Gender: Male
User Title: Ultimate Video Game nerd.

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Guitar_Guy » Mon, 17th Aug 2009 23:39

zephyr wrote:Very true, but if we took the scientific studies of what the books says, like when they use frog DNA. Just a thought, But we arent leaving this earth for a while so you never know, I just hope I get to hear about something before I die xD.
You obviously didn't read the long version. Before you reply, read the whole thing as I covered the theories in the book. Also, you have to remember that the book is FICTIONAL. While Michael Chriton did do research for the book, it is still fiction.
Image
"You have to go on and be crazy. Craziness is like heaven" - Jimi Hendrix
Fight Spam Here!
User avatar
Guitar_Guy
Predator
Predator
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon, 10th Aug 2009 18:12
Location: United States - Indiana
Gender: Male
User Title: GG, Moses

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby The Witch King » Tue, 18th Aug 2009 4:24

Too many topics already exist on this subject, and they all contain my general opinion on this subject.
User avatar
The Witch King
Park Ranger
Park Ranger
 
Posts: 4887
Joined: Mon, 15th Jan 2007 7:32
Location: My dark throne in Mordor.
Gender: Male
User Title: Lord of the Nazgûl

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Reprieve » Tue, 18th Aug 2009 12:27

The Witch King wrote:Too many topics already exist on this subject, and they all contain my general opinion on this subject.

We just need a "TWK on ________ " topic for reference
Image
User avatar
Reprieve
Park Admin
Park Admin
 
Posts: 6148
Joined: Thu, 17th Apr 2008 16:43
Location: In your worst nightmare
Gender: Male
User Title: flagellum dei

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby The Grim Reaper » Sat, 22nd Aug 2009 13:49

Guitar_Guy wrote:Short Story: Unless someone can go back in time and take dinosaurs from their natural habitat, assuming that the repercussions of said event do not completely alter time, it is not possible, especially in the case of Jurassic Park.

Long Story: Jurassic Park centers on the hypothesis that DNA can be obtained from fossils and then used to clone dinosaurs, however, the are numerous problems with this theory first and foremost being the acquisition of DNA. Bones most of the time are too old to contain any more DNA. The ones that do have DNA, have such sparse amounts that there is no way that one could ever obtain enough fossils to compensate because such an amount does not exist do to the rare series of events that MUST occur for a fossil to form. The other method suggested was the acquisition of DNA from amber, however, just like in the game, no one knows what DNA the amber contains, and, again, it is too tiny of an amount to create a dinosaur. These amounts are so tiny that it would be like getting one or two words, maybe a sentence if you're lucky, from "War and Peace" and trying to figure out the whole book. Also, they suggested using DNA from a frog to make up for the holes in the code. The result would be that the dino, assuming it lived, would more likely be a mutant frog and would die very soon due to the fact that its body would not function right. Think modifying game code but adding extra spaces and deleting parts of it, BOOM, game crashes. Also, if you read "Jurassic Park: The Lost World" it said that because the dinos do not have PROPER parents, they would not act as they would have millions of years ago. For example, the raptors in the book had a very crude social structure because they didn't grow up with one in place and were not taught it. Imagine taking care of yourself in the wild from birth with only your brothers and sisters to help you and no parents. So that rules out Jurassic Park's theories.

Modern technology has proposed a new theory called retro evolution. This entails taking dinosaurs modern day form (birds) and reverting them back to dinosaur-like creatures by giving them protein "signals" while they are still forming. When you look at the embryology of birds, you find that the bird actually somewhat resembles a dino. Notice the many vertebrae in the tail. Someone also suggested that teeth could be formed. In theory, if this was done to a bird like an emu for many years, we might get a dinosaur-like creature over time. However, it would never truly be a dinosaur. Also, so far, as with regular cloning, the chances for success are slim to none, think one in thousands of trials (it took 10 years to produce Dolly, the first cloned sheep). So, like I said, there will probably be no future Jurassic Park. In the words of Dr. Alan Grant "Dinosaurs died 65 million years ago, what is left of them is fossilized in rock, and it is in the rock that real scientists make real discoveries."


They have found bones wich still contain blood vessels, possibly with a small amount of DNA.
Kovu wrote:Possible? Some time in the future, yes. But should it be done? No. We should take care of todays ecosystems instead of reintroducing completely foreign organisms, which will destroy them even more.

Further, no matter how you do it... these 'Dinosaurs' won't represent the real, mesozoic species. They will be mutants designed by man. As much as I like dinosaurs, I'm against it. And I wish homo sapiens would invest more in conservation of natural environments and its inhabitants...


I personally agree with Kovu. Why spend billions of pounds creating mutant creatures when there's a whole fascinating ecosystem out there that needs to be saved?
Image

If you desire help with modding, please come to my questions page at http://modgenesis.hostingdelivered.com/viewtopic.php?f=58&p=109223#p109154.
User avatar
The Grim Reaper
Herbivore
Herbivore
 
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon, 3rd Aug 2009 11:41
Location: The dark voids of time and space...
Gender: Male
User Title: The Grim Reaper, The Personification of Death, The Stealer of Souls, The Ultimate Reality, The Harvester of Mankind, The Swallower of Oceans.

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Guitar_Guy » Sat, 22nd Aug 2009 15:43

The Grim Reaper wrote:They have found bones wich still contain blood vessels, possibly with a small amount of DNA.

Keyword is small, like I said before, the amount is so tiny that you would have to have a huge amount of fossils for that one dinosaur. There just aren't enough fossils in the world to get that amount, and you couldn't be sure if you would get repeats in the genetic code.
Image
"You have to go on and be crazy. Craziness is like heaven" - Jimi Hendrix
Fight Spam Here!
User avatar
Guitar_Guy
Predator
Predator
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon, 10th Aug 2009 18:12
Location: United States - Indiana
Gender: Male
User Title: GG, Moses

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby The Witch King » Sat, 22nd Aug 2009 17:19

The Grim Reaper wrote:They have found bones wich still contain blood vessels, possibly with a small amount of DNA.
Wrong. They never found any such thing. No dinosaur DNA has been found. We've only ever found dinosaur proteins.
User avatar
The Witch King
Park Ranger
Park Ranger
 
Posts: 4887
Joined: Mon, 15th Jan 2007 7:32
Location: My dark throne in Mordor.
Gender: Male
User Title: Lord of the Nazgûl

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby The Grim Reaper » Sat, 22nd Aug 2009 17:37

The Witch King wrote:
The Grim Reaper wrote:They have found bones which still contain blood vessels, possibly with a small amount of DNA.
Wrong. They never found any such thing. No dinosaur DNA has been found. We've only ever found dinosaur proteins.
They may find some in the far future, and there are people who like to keep this sort of thing a secret, but I don't want dinosaurs cloned anyway. We need to look after what we have on the planet, not create mutants.
Image

If you desire help with modding, please come to my questions page at http://modgenesis.hostingdelivered.com/viewtopic.php?f=58&p=109223#p109154.
User avatar
The Grim Reaper
Herbivore
Herbivore
 
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon, 3rd Aug 2009 11:41
Location: The dark voids of time and space...
Gender: Male
User Title: The Grim Reaper, The Personification of Death, The Stealer of Souls, The Ultimate Reality, The Harvester of Mankind, The Swallower of Oceans.

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Docszoo » Sat, 22nd Aug 2009 18:51

The Witch King wrote:No dinosaur DNA has been found. We've only ever found dinosaur proteins.


Have you ever thought how off this sounds? DNA makes proteins. Proteins contain DNA. . .
-Andrew
User avatar
Docszoo
Apex Hunter
Apex Hunter
 
Posts: 2962
Joined: Mon, 26th May 2008 16:31
Location: New Mexico
Gender: Male
User Title: Docszoo

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby The Witch King » Sat, 22nd Aug 2009 19:14

Docszoo wrote:DNA makes proteins. Proteins contain DNA. . .
Yes, it does. However the fact of the matter is that no DNA was found. None.

And no, proteins do not contain DNA. That's hard to do, when they are made out of two different acid groups. I never thought you would make an error like that. They assist in DNA replication, but they don't contain it.
User avatar
The Witch King
Park Ranger
Park Ranger
 
Posts: 4887
Joined: Mon, 15th Jan 2007 7:32
Location: My dark throne in Mordor.
Gender: Male
User Title: Lord of the Nazgûl

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Docszoo » Sat, 22nd Aug 2009 20:42

Yeah, that was what I was thinking too. But, still. Proteins are more important than DNA now-a-days anyway.
-Andrew
User avatar
Docszoo
Apex Hunter
Apex Hunter
 
Posts: 2962
Joined: Mon, 26th May 2008 16:31
Location: New Mexico
Gender: Male
User Title: Docszoo

Re: A real Jurassic park

Unread postby Jametosaurus33 » Wed, 1st Jan 2014 5:47

I saw a documentary where a female palaeontologist found a broken DNA strand of a pregnant T-Rex.
Jametosaurus33
Park Visitor
Park Visitor
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun, 29th Sep 2013 13:37
Gender: Male
User Title: Member

Next

Return to Scientopia

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Help keep this forum ad-free - please Donate


This free, ad-free forum is hosted by ForumLaunch
cron