Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Sabertooth tigers could become a zoo exhibit   ( divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

12555 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Feb 2003 at 10:57 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

104 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

2003-02-01 11:44:51 PM  
02-01-03 11:41:55 PM

Ewe, I wonder if they would be hairy?

Cave pasties.
2003-02-01 11:45:26 PM  
I dont know what fag posted this, but TechTV isnt someguy!
2003-02-01 11:50:33 PM  
I didn't know that Tech TV was big in the homosexual community.
2003-02-01 11:52:36 PM  
i just got a great idea for a movie from this

i'll call it jimmy and the cloneasaurous
2003-02-01 11:57:36 PM  
That is highly improbable. There has been work done in trying to find a way to clone the only shortly extinct (hunted to extinction 100 years ago) tasmanian tiger. Even with tissue samples "presserved" the cells are in such a degenerated state that the scientists working on it are up against huge barrier. I doubt bones that are even less preserved are going to be a viable source for the genetic information required to clona anything using current technology.

If it is ever even possible it is a long, long way off.
2003-02-02 12:00:40 AM  
"Recent successes in the field of interspecies embryo transfer..."

This could get very ugly.
2003-02-02 12:05:06 AM  
Interspecies embryo transfer? I haven't heard of that....Damn those whacky Raelians, what will they come up with next?
2003-02-02 12:06:53 AM  
Must go faster!
2003-02-02 12:07:08 AM  
Reactron: "make me cave sandwiches" = euphemism for something else, right? I'll use that one from now on.

This stuff is about as plausible as the Raelians' claim that we'll all soon have clone servants to clean our houses. In other words, not very (at least in the near to mid future).
2003-02-02 12:08:10 AM  
why do we need to clone humans if we already have billions?
2003-02-02 12:09:27 AM  
They probably won't clone sabertooth cats.

What they probably will do is isolate the genes responsible for various key traits (like the teeth) and splice 'em into DNA from existing big cats.

They'll produce marketable hybrids that are artificial and copyrighted / trademarked. First for zoos and circuses and such, and then, in modified form, as expensive designer pets.

People will buy sabertooth tiger kittens that never age past about 3-6 months' physical development, and maybe live ten years. Possibly longer, possibly shorter. Lion and tiger kittens, too, and puppies, and so on.

These will be non-viable (ie, infertile), so they won't be breedable. Different companies will offer different models, with each one securing the rights to that particular design. And it won't stop at mammals.

Twenty years, tops. Unless something big happens to stop it. That's my prediction.
2003-02-02 12:12:13 AM  

That's what Professor Hammond(?) and co. thought too...
2003-02-02 12:19:12 AM  
maybe we can breed women with huge breasts...

damn, we already did that.
2003-02-02 12:19:43 AM  
paging Dr. Grant, paging Dr. Grant
2003-02-02 12:23:03 AM  
What I hate is when I get drunk I can see my eyelashes distorting my vision while I look at my computer screen. I guess I have to cut off my eyelashes.

Anyone got help for this problem ? I don't want to cut off my eyelashes.
2003-02-02 12:24:06 AM  
RandomAxe, do you think we can get some flying cars and penis enlargement pills that work by then too?
2003-02-02 12:24:14 AM  
[radical christian terrorist]

Cloning is against the will of GOD! You heathens shall burn in HELL for this vile blasphemy! The clone wouldn't have a soul, just like demons don't have souls, therefor the clone would be an abomination against Jesus Christ!

And it is against God's will to bring back sabertooth tigers or anyother animal that did not survive the biblical flood brought down upon the vile sinners of Genesis! If God told Noah not to bring them aboard the Ark then we must respect, nay PRAISE! his descision! All doctors participating in this vile blasphemy must be stoned to death and their bodies burned so as to keep humanity clean from their filthy wretchedness!

[/radical christian terrorist]
2003-02-02 12:25:43 AM  
the line is actually Dinosaurs eat man, woman inherits the Earth.

And that's not the best line. The best line is Now, you might eventually have DINOSAURS on your, on your dinosaur tour, right? Hello?.
2003-02-02 12:27:31 AM  
Michael Crichton rOOlz!, January 22, 2003
Reviewer: A 12-year old reader
Jurassic Park was a very fun, exciting book written by Michael Crichton. I really enjoyed the action in the book; however, some of it was gruesome and disgusting. Many people died, but who cares anyway. In the book Richard Hammond clones dinosaurs with ancient blood from bugs trapped in amber. He used the DNA to clone dinosaurs to make lots and lots of MONEY!!! But sometimes the dinosaurs escaped and reeked havoc on the park. Eventually the dinosaurs can reproduce making loads and LOADS of vicious velociraptors. How will they control the dinos? Read the book to find out. --This text refers to the Mass Market Paperback edition.

Was this review helpful to you?

2003-02-02 12:28:49 AM  
fark that, just goto

And try to comprehend the universe. Personally I like pulsars because they talk. Blip blip Blip blip..
2003-02-02 12:29:29 AM  
kids love dinosaurs
/proof of evolution
2003-02-02 12:31:28 AM  
If they clone Sabertooths strictly for zoo exhibits you do realize that animal rights activists will be all over how these new exclusively captive animals have the right to be out in the wild in their natural habitat. They (PETA and other animal rights groups) however, will not be able to explain how you put a Sabertooth tiger in its "natural habitat." You know since there was a whole ice age and various climate changes since their extinction.
2003-02-02 12:32:29 AM  
Coolness Factor: 27.8

Out of a scale from 3 to 17
2003-02-02 12:33:50 AM  
First sharks with friggin laser on their foreheads, now sabretooth tigers, what will those scientist types think up next...
2003-02-02 12:38:41 AM  
Monkeys with propellers up their noses. That's what's next.
2003-02-02 12:41:47 AM  
Purple_Paramecium sez: That's what Professor Hammond(?) and co. thought too...

Really? I don't remember that part of the book. Oh, wait -- did that have something to do with the miniature elephant I'm vaguely remembering? Maybe. Crichton is pretty lazy about science, though. Jurassic Park was OK -- both the book and the movie -- but the science is crap, for a wide variety of reasons. And you can tell Crichton's research was half-assed because sometimes the science errors are subtle, and sometimes they're just embarrasing.
2003-02-02 12:47:38 AM  
ChadManMn sez: RandomAxe, do you think we can get some flying cars and penis enlargement pills that work by then too?

-- Flying cars . . . not until robust AI is well-accepted and trusted. Imagine the traffic in a major city. Ugly. Now imagine that all those cars are flying around, piloted by the same asswipes. I don't think so. Even if were practical, it wouldn't be allowed.

But once automated (computer-driven) cars go mainstream (5-10 years in Japan, possibly soon after in the US), then flying cars will be plausible. You'll get in, enter a destination code (similar to a phone number or ZIP code), and the car will automatically go to a designated take-off / landing area, fly along mandated flight paths, and land.

-- Penis-enlargement pills . . . troublesome. The irony is that that wouldn't be so difficult if you gave the pill to children (mostly boys, I'd imagine . . .), but I don't see that happening any time soon. Pills for adult men would be tricky. I can think of a few plausible stop-gap technologies, but Viagra and variations on that theme are probably going to be pretty much as good as it gets for the near future.
2003-02-02 12:51:22 AM  
Won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!!?!
2003-02-02 12:53:03 AM  
I'm not worried about penis size, but it would be nice to have much larger balls.
2003-02-02 12:53:14 AM  
I disagree RandomAxe, in most of his books he shows a firm understanding of the topic at hand. Everything in his books that relate to science are cutting edge ideas at the time, and while in hindsight some of it may seem silly, he has been quite accurate and provides more accurate information than most casual readers would ever get.
2003-02-02 01:06:02 AM  
I think it'd be cool to have sabreteeth. But it'd be the equivalent of a penis extention for vampire boys.
2003-02-02 01:06:26 AM  
I disagree RandomAxe, in most of his books he shows a firm understanding of the topic at hand.

You think so? He really hasn't struck me that way. I always get the feeling that he does a bunch of research and then, at some point, figures, "Well, I've got enough now to technobabble over any plot device I want to use."

I read Jurassic Park before it came out in paperback, frex, and I rolled my eyes a lot. The genetics stuff is grossly over simplified, and I could live with most of that, but the ecology is utterly preposterous.

And the idea of a dinosaur changing its gender because it has frog DNA mixed in is less likely than the idea of it hopping and snagging bugs with a front-hinged extendable tongue. Much less the idea of multiple species of dinos doing that. He should've just said that they were reproducing parthenogenetically. Especially since there's a parallel drawn to turkeys early in the story anyway.

It still wasn't a bad book, and the movie (the first one) was mostly good, but the science is ridiculous. He certainly has clever moments, but I think of him as a pulp writer more than SF.

Maybe it's just me, too. S'OK.
2003-02-02 01:11:10 AM  
Oh come on, it's just fiction. Next someone will be ragging Judy Blume for 'Dear God, it's me Margaret' saying she never proved the existance of God. Same goes for the all time great, Dr. Seuss.
2003-02-02 01:13:15 AM  
Dr. Seuss proved the existence of Star-bellied Sneeches.
2003-02-02 01:13:20 AM  
Same goes for the all time great, Dr. Seuss.

Well, you have to admit that it is rather implausable that all the Hoos would have sung after christmas was taken from them? And hearts growing three sizes in ONE DAY? Preposterous!
2003-02-02 01:18:26 AM  
Oh come on, it's just fiction.

Well, sure. I'm not trying to blow it out of proportion. For some people, verisimilitude is more important to a story, and for some people it's less important. Which is what you should expect.

For me -- and there's no reason this needs to be true for anyone else -- a story told in a realist tone generally needs quite a lot of verisimilitude, or it doesn't work for me.

I write SF myself, and sometimes my readers complain about this too, so it's not like I'm perfect either. And I'm not absolutist about it -- I don't complain about bad science in Star Wars, frex, because I don't think it matters in that story.

But, for me, a story has to justify itself if it also insults my intelligence. I admit to being pretty picky, but that's just how I am, and I don't have a problem with other people liking whatever they like. It's a big world, and yadda yadda yadda.
2003-02-02 01:18:55 AM  
Horton was schizophrenic.
2003-02-02 01:26:34 AM
2003-02-02 01:31:46 AM  
I'm sorry, I cannot accept the view of a man with goggles and a rocket pack on :-P just kidding

He made some...odd...jumps when going through JP, but it seems to be mostly in the realm of science fiction (IMO). Most of his books contain a large portion of possibility while containing a small amount of probablility.

I prefer his works to science fantasy, but he is not my source for scientific information :)

You're obviously a well read and informed person (judging from posts I have seen you make in this and other threads). I only disagree with you on minor opinion points (scifi/pulp meh, most of his stuff makes for a nice read either way) I like the actuall discussion of the topic though, so I would enjoy continuing the topic. And I won't push my opinion on authors anymore, unless the topic is about fiction writters.

I won't push my opinion on one of many authors out there.
2003-02-02 01:59:14 AM  
I'm sorry, I cannot accept the view of a man with goggles and a rocket pack on

I get that a lot . . . but I'm working on a freeze ray now, which should help get people to take me seriously.

There's no such thing as a story that no one can find something to complain about. My feeling is, if you enjoy reading something, read it. I've read a number of Crichton's books, so I obviously think he's doing something right.

A good example of what I'm talking about is the film The 13th Warrior. That movie is chock full of ridiculously implausible elements, but it's still very watchable. I think it's even more enjoyable if you pick it apart with a bunch of friends, but it's entertaining either way.

Whereas -- and this clearly puts me in a minority -- the story problems in The Matrix totally ruined it for me. Not that I think the Wachowski brothers will be crying themselves to sleep tonight if they happen to read that . . . .

And it doesn't bother me that most of my friends think it was an awesome movie. People like what they like.
2003-02-02 02:05:53 AM  
cant happen, animals eat specific food, and have to have the right bacteria in their guts to digest it, your immune system is inherited too, and fighting of diff diseases as well, the elephant has to eat its mothers feces for over a year to build up to eating on its own...yada yada
2003-02-02 02:37:45 AM  
that having been said...
2003-02-02 02:39:27 AM  
that having been said...
[image from too old to be available]
2003-02-02 03:04:56 AM  
Is a Neanderthal a human? Science says no. In that case can we clone them for future zoos? As pets? As servants?

As I understand it doing dino DNA ala J. Park is unlikely. But the more recent ice age creatures are almost a done deal. Saber cats, dire wolves, sloths and of course early man. If we start can we stop?
2003-02-02 03:27:47 AM  
Tasmanian tiger

The last tasmanian tiger died in 1936, scientists were trying to clone tissue pressereved in ethanol since 1866. As one scientist commented Others, among them the researchers who brought the world Dolly the Sheep, are less diplomatic.

"There's about a snowball's chance in hell of this project being successful," says Harry Griffin, assistant director of Scotland's Roslin Institute.

Think about it, this tissue is only 150 years old and the toubles in cloning it are huge. And someone is out there claiming they have a shot at cloning the big cat that became extinct more than 11,000 years ago? Not likely.
2003-02-02 03:37:15 AM  
Lord_Farquard, you might be interested in a couple of books by Michael Bishop.

In Ancient of Days, it's discovered that some Homo habilenes have actually survived into the present, and one of them tries to enter modern society. It's not as hokey a story as it may sound, either.

In No Enemy But Time, a guy travels way back in time and lives with a group of Australopithecenes.

I thought they were both extremely interesting reads.
2003-02-02 04:23:54 AM  
a few things:

"We have less than 300 siberian tigers left in the world, if they could bring them back from the brink of extiction that would a great thing."
- so we could then drive them to extinction?
Duderock - curl them
hahaha - "reeked havoc"
/back to the grog
2003-02-02 05:25:15 AM  
Great, maybe we could feed them extinct bananas...

/subtle fark reference
2003-02-02 08:18:08 AM  
wow, nobody even realizes that theyve just been duped into reading an advertisment for a god damn television show about some crackpot, slightly disguised as an article about a crackpot.

farking sheep!
2003-02-02 10:41:15 AM  
Just so you know, I'm the fag who posted this and it was my first link post and I wasn't sure what to do. Sorry about my apparent fagginess.
Displayed 50 of 104 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.