Lifted from the Dragon's Tales
Apr. 28th, 2013 01:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Does Brand ego-google? Anyway, if I was going to make up a list of pundits who could be creatively mined by SF writers as Tommy Gold used to be, Brand would be near the top of the list.
As I recall, Pamela Sargent's Cloned Lives has a concern about recreating lost species via advanced biotech I have not seen elsewhere that I remember: knowing it's possible to bring back a dead species might make it more acceptable to drive species extinct in the first place. Not that people seem all that averse to extinctifying species...
My suspicion is that cute or impressive species would benefit from recreating but the uggos would not. Even if a quarter billion years had not reduced their genetic information to noise, nobody wants to see gorgonopsids or therocephalians come back.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-29 01:01 am (UTC)Stewart Brand
Date: 2013-04-29 07:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-28 06:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-28 07:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-28 09:53 pm (UTC)Note that the techniques described depend fairly heavily on having a related species around, even in birds. Much worse in mammals; we don't be getting any thylacines back because of a lack of near-relatives suitable to be incubators, and we might not be able to manage a mammoth if extant elephants have diverged too much.
Still, chickens with alien gonads is a very cool technology and I can see it being immensely useful with the various horribly threatened galliform birds, like sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-29 09:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-29 02:23 am (UTC)I once had lunch with him when he gave a colloquium at Fermilab.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-29 03:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-30 03:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-29 02:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-29 04:14 pm (UTC)Damm but I miss WER though.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-29 09:29 pm (UTC)A criticism of species salvage that I recall hearing in the very early 70s, as I recall, with that addendum that it's a potential sop to conservationists - you can always say that you've saved the species while proceeding to develop its habitat in such a way that the species in question can never be successfully re-introduced into it, even if successful recovery of viable individuals of the species in question is ever technologically feasible. In time, ideally, the greenies will get distracted by something else anyway and you can get on with your shrimp-farming, strip mining or whatever.