Is it possible to clone/revive dinosaurs?

[Son of Lothar]

Experts say that Dinosaurs dominated the planet for about 160 million years. Humans have only been around for like 200,000 years and at around 50,000 years we became more modern appearing. So.... WTF..... Dinosaurs have been on this planet way longer than we have. If it weren't for the meteor that hit the earth 65 million years ago, we would of not existed at all. So, with all that history of dinosaurs... why is it so hard for us to come up with a strand of DNA?

Ok ok.... I can understand there are many factors then just getting a complete strand of dinosaur DNA. However, I find it interesting as to which species most resembles dinosaurs and how they can use their resources to clone a dinosaur. Some experts say Birds (chickens, Eagles, Hawks) and some say Lizards (Crocs, Alligators, comodo dragons) and some say both. I think Lizards most resemble dinosaurs and I think would be better suited to clone a dinosaur.

I predict that in atleast 100 years we should be able to have the technology to clone dinosaurs. What do you guys think?

[Nereth]

You would need to find some viable fossilized DNA to start with.

[WomboMyCombo]

I don't think it's possible, but i think it would be unethical to do so.

[Devwar]

Unlikely. There aren't any viable DNA samples around. Those "bones" you see in the museums aren't bones but rocks who took the shape of the bones as part of the fossilisation process. Rocks have no DNA.

However, it is likely to clone more recent stuff like mammoths for example.

This isn't entirely true. Some bones have been found to have dna still residing inside of them. It is also why preserved remains are a great find (eggs/amber/things in tar/whatnot).

The Discover Channel had a show on last year about the possibility of activating a lot of the old genes/dna in chickens/birds to give them the appearance of dinosaurs, such as being able to activate more of the scales (chicken legs are scaly) or to allow a chicken to grow a tail. Cool stuff.

[Deviante]

I have no idea how long dna preserves but 160billion years is a pretty damn long time :] And it's also somewhat impossible to say for sure what dinosaurs looked like. Afaik the biggest similarities in dinosaurs and some animals we seen today are their bone structure, not so much about their looks.

[Zethras]

Unlikely. There aren't any viable DNA samples around. Those "bones" you see in the museums aren't bones but rocks who took the shape of the bones as part of the fossilisation process. Rocks have no DNA.

However, it is likely to clone more recent stuff like mammoths for example.

This.

I've watched credible shows about this on the discovery channel, and those palaeontologists/scientists say that DNA will completely degrade after approximately 15,000-20,000 years, making it not viable for the cloning process, and that's why Mammoths are a more likely candidate for cloning, since they existed during the ice age, which was about 10,000 years ago, plus the freezing temperatures might act as a sort of natural cryogenisis, preserving the DNA more fully.

[Deleted]

Aren't the Japanese attempting to clone a mammoth?

(http://singularityhub.com/2011/01/19...xt-five-years/)

And yea, dinosaurs aren't frozen i know, but still if you are interessted in cloning i suggest you read this ^

[Pitchkart]

Most people agree that dinosaurs weren't even lizards. They were closer to reptiles. And fossilized "feathered raptors" contribute to the bird theory.

Mammoths are theoretically possible to clone because they're relatively recent, and we've found intact mammoths, preserved in tombs of ice. Dinosaurs are ancient, though. Mammoths were around for humans to hunt, but not dinosaurs. As an above poster said, all of the fossils we find are just minerals that have taken the place of bones and feathers in the fossilization process. In order to get an intact DNA sample, we would have to find a preserved sample. And even if it were preserved somehow, I'm not sure if DNA would last 65 million + years... it may just break down on its own over time, regardless of external intervention.

[Tholl]

Just so you know OP, humans have been around for about 3 million years (The lucy Fossil).

Homo Sapiens about 200 - 400 thousand years. (They are not sure on the time as we are contantly finding new information on them etc).

As for lizards looking like dinosaurs, they are far more removed then avians. (They actually NOW just found out that raptors AND T-Rex had feathers covering them >.< ).

It would be a long shot to clone any dinosaur as the DNA strands will be next to impossible to replicate even with splicing. (They DID figure out that they can in fact breed mammoths back, but it would take multiple generations and close to 100 years to do so. Nothing that any group wants to put money into).

Edit - Someone already brought up the mammoth

[rantus]

Yes, it is possible, although we still need to develop the final tech to do it. The hardest part would be to find a DNA sample.

We'll be bringing back Mammoths in 20 years or so though, since we have examples of their DNA, and could probably use an elephant to give birth to it, rather than having to lab grow them.

---------- Post added 2011-02-01 at 05:23 PM ----------

Most people agree that dinosaurs weren't even lizards. They were closer to reptiles. And fossilized "feathered raptors" contribute to the bird theory.

Lizards are reptiles. You're right though, they weren't lizards. Birds are the descendants of them, from the Theropod sub order , and still technically dinosaurs, although are not known as dinosaurs in common terms.

[Son of Lothar]

Yea... but you could argue that if we had the DNA to clone a dinosaur... would you rather use a croc egg or a chicken egg? Can't really use either of them because obviously the DNA is different but I would imagine the croc egg would have more similarities thena chick egg.

Just so you know OP, humans have been around for about 3 million years (The lucy Fossil).

They found 1 fossil that replicates a homo sapien. Where are the others? you are seeing a gap from 3 million to 200,000 years. Sounds strange to me.

[Pitchkart]

Lizards are reptiles.

You're right, I'm sorry. I was spouting off crap I'd heard from teachers and TV documentaries 15 years ago without pausing to think that they probably weren't completely accurate. I'd forgotten to unlearn that part of my education.

As for the actual cloning process and which modern species to use as a 'host,' I'd venture as to say there probably isn't a suitable host. Another good thing with Mammoths being so recent is that we have a very similar species right now, although modern elephants are much smaller than a mammoth. I kind of doubt any egg we use today would be compatible. Or big enough.

[Devwar]

Yea... but you could argue that if we had the DNA to clone a dinosaur... would you rather use a croc egg or a chicken egg? Can't really use either of them because obviously the DNA is different but I would imagine the croc egg would have more similarities thena chick egg.

They found 1 fossil that replicates a homo sapien. Where are the others? you are seeing a gap from 3 million to 200,000 years. Sounds strange to me.

Crocodiles are a different strain than things like a T-Rex or Velociraptor, which relate more to chickens. Prehistoric Crocodiles existed 300 million years ago.

In regards to the "human gap":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_habilis - 2 to 1 million years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_erectus - After them(ish)

Keep in mind, just like we are today, ancient humans were considered social, and buried/cared for their dead. Also a lot harder to find remains for smaller things like humans that decompose quickly as opposed to GIANT creatures like the dinosaurs.

[gibbie99]

This.

I've watched credible shows about this on the discovery channel, and those palaeontologists/scientists say that DNA will completely degrade after approximately 15,000-20,000 years, making it not viable for the cloning process, and that's why Mammoths are a more likely candidate for cloning, since they existed during the ice age, which was about 10,000 years ago, plus the freezing temperatures might act as a sort of natural cryogenisis, preserving the DNA more fully.

This is true. I am a biomedical scientist, I worked in a human DNA lab where some of us used fossilized remains. After 20k years only very small fragments of DNA remain, making it very difficult to sequence even minute genomes such as mtDNA which is...10k or so. Now, we have 3 billion bp genome, I'm not sure about others. Frogs have way more. Plants have something like 100 billion bp genomes.

Sadly this is pretty much science fiction unless we find some good sample. Now we can start toying with bird DNA, turn on and off genes. But which and for what. It starts to get enormously complicated when you talk about gene transcription. It's kinda amazing how life works, development is fair from simple, far from it. I think the most we can do right now is grow eyes where legs are in insects or something simple like we do with flies now.

[Ave07]

What about the flies that are in ambers like in Jurrasic Park? O.o

[zorkuus]

We wouldn't need to clone/create a dinosaur from preserved dinosaur remains. We could "manufacture" them from ground up, using completely non-dino DNA. They would look like dinosaurs but built from non-dinosaur building blocks, true genetic engineering, the ability to shape life as one pleases, like a piece of clay. DNA would become like legos. Although I think that kind of technology would be even more far screthed than finding actual dino-DNA and using that for the basis of cloning them.

[Felya]

Yea... but you could argue that if we had the DNA to clone a dinosaur... would you rather use a croc egg or a chicken egg? Can't really use either of them because obviously the DNA is different but I would imagine the croc egg would have more similarities thena chick egg.

Neither, it would be an ostrich egg, both due to having the largest egg and it being the largest flightless bird. They are also some of the oldest birds we have on record and at least for some time inhabited land from Africa to China.

They found 1 fossil that replicates a homo sapien. Where are the others? you are seeing a gap from 3 million to 200,000 years. Sounds strange to me.

This is a thread discussing how the only thing really keeping us from cloning dinosaur, is how hard it is to find a usable sample. You see people discussing how just recently we figured out that dinosaur were closer related to bird than alligators. I don't understand how you can ask where are things from 3 million years ago. It's in the context...

[haxartus]

We have trouble finding a well preserved mammoth cell, and they died quite recently.
Also, we need a close relative to the species for the cloning process. In the mammoth case we have elephants, which share a common ancestor with the mammoths.

[blizzardcashshop]

they'll be able to one day, but like all technology, it will be applied to war and/or medicine somehow THEN they'll do fun stuff with it like recreate a velociraptor

then i could pvp irl with my pet RAPTOR

200 years ago, reaching orbit seemed less likely than colonizing mars does today, now it's common knowledge that it happened and how it was done

[Deleted]

dunno level archeology and alchemy and check it for yourself.