Undoubtedly climate change aided the demise of the mammoth however the change of habitat resulting from this doesn't seem enough to cause the extinction of mammoths since that species survived previous and more dramatic changes in climate and habitat.
Without the pressure of hunting mammoths survived a further 8000 years on a couple of un-inhabitated islands.
As for aggression being a sign of fear consider the rhinoceros:
The two african species are exceedingly aggressive while the Sumatran Rhino which did not evolve in the presence of humans is extremely placid.
If you were able to find one in the wild you can just walk up to them and cuddle or kill them as they simply have no concept of fear of creatures smaller than themselves.
Similarly the african elephant is rather aggressive while its indian cousin is quite docile. The indian species only remains because it was possible to domesticate it.
Unfortunately animal aggression does nothing to protect them from guns.
Let's see.
Asian elephants regularly and deliberately kill their keepers and are "domesticated" only with great difficulty and brutality. During stone age times they had no difficulty in maintaining their numbers. Such an animal, intelligent, with highly developed senses and remarkably stealthy if wants to be, and quite unpredictable, presents serious challenges to primitive hunters compared to smaller prey.
The carnivores of N. America and Eurasia contemporary with mammoths and other megafauna were ferocious. Bison, which survived into modern times in large numbers are very fierce, unpredictably dangerous animals. It is a very large jump of imagination to think that animals such as mammoths, which certainly were not isolated island species living without predators, presented easy pickings for stone age hunters.
The mammoths which survived on Wrangle Island, even the pygmy species, had to deal with polar bears and I expect were every bit as unpredictable as musk oxen which have to deal with bears and wolves.
There is no direct evidence stone age folk exterminated these animals, is there?
Evidence is coming forth that their food supply disappeared.
The assumptions I've made are at least as reasonable as yours.
Reading this thread,
Makes me think...if you don't evolve your finished..animals that haven't evolved and remain the same for century's become prey..
The buzz word seems to be technology..if you don't have it your at the mercy of those that do...no matter how aggressive you are..
How sad..that you are probably doomed if nature doesn't give you hands..
I have now had a realisation..we have to move forward..no matter how scary..and no matter how we try to stay in control..we aren't in control. Everything that can be done one day will be done..why because it can be done! where does morality fit in?
Here is a thought..imagine someone cloned us from a DNA sample...and there were no other humans alive...
Regards
M. Gregg
Makes me think...if you don't evolve your finished..animals that haven't evolved and remain the same for century's become prey..
The buzz word seems to be technology..if you don't have it your at the mercy of those that do...no matter how aggressive you are..
How sad..that you are probably doomed if nature doesn't give you hands..
I have now had a realisation..we have to move forward..no matter how scary..and no matter how we try to stay in control..we aren't in control. Everything that can be done one day will be done..why because it can be done! where does morality fit in?
Here is a thought..imagine someone cloned us from a DNA sample...and there were no other humans alive...
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
That's an interesting perspective. I would tend to think it's technology that has doomed life on this planet, not the lack of it. Which is precisely why we are not only not in control, but out of control.
I'm sympathetic with your view.
Indeed. We don't always ask, is this the right thing to do? We can't even know, in some circumstances, that we have to ask the question:
10,000 years ago we started domesticating and herding animals. That's a lot more efficient and safe, at first glance, than hunting a calorie/protein source. As time went on it apparently became clear we need to limit the number of animals on a range to save it from overgrazing.
Now some researchers are starting to think such practice leads to desertification of semi-arid places, (not efficient or safe), because in original conditions these areas were grazed by huge numbers of animals kept in motion by sheer numbers and fierce predators and in the process fertilizing and mulching the land to hold water from rains and support new growth.
They suggest imitating the original conditions through herding and fencing. As might be expected these ideas meet with fierce questioning but there are experiments in various places which seem to bear out the contention.
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...mages&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights=&gws_rd=ssl
Suppose these claims are borne out. We can't say the ancestors 1000's of years ago should have asked, "is this the right thing to do." How could they have known to ask? I'm sure the question asked at time (the right question) was,"Will this keep us fed?"
On the other hand cloning a mammoth, if possible, seems a candidate for examination on the basis of "just cuz we can, does it mean we should do it?"
But, should we get into space just cuz we can? It's wasteful, grandiose. You bet. It might save everything, including the pregnant gay whales.😀
How do you know,
you can do something until you do it..ie we think (in theory) we can clone a Mammoth..then the scary one we think we can clone a human..
Rendezvous with Rama comes to mind..we can't save the earth but we can make a miniature ark of DNA however it would only work if we can clone..
It would seem we know whats required to save every species on this planet...even if at the moment we don't know the whole story imagine if some intelligent aliens had the same idea and kept DNA of every species since the beginning of the earth...they wouldn't need to take us they can recreate us.. If we had saved the DNA of the Dodo we could have it back again..we just didn't know that at the time..
They could seed other planets from us..
The ark doesn't sound so daft now..size is not the issue.
A zoo of all life found kept as DNA..how long before we make the lego set...build your own Mammoth..create your own Eden..
It would seem all the pieces could be available..
The question now is choice..do we stay as we are or change..(I don't think we have a choice)..it will be forced upon us just because we exist or fade away..
Perhaps the people using cryogenics to save themselves never thought they would be saved as clones..but is it you or another person..
Regards
M. Gregg
you can do something until you do it..ie we think (in theory) we can clone a Mammoth..then the scary one we think we can clone a human..
Rendezvous with Rama comes to mind..we can't save the earth but we can make a miniature ark of DNA however it would only work if we can clone..
It would seem we know whats required to save every species on this planet...even if at the moment we don't know the whole story imagine if some intelligent aliens had the same idea and kept DNA of every species since the beginning of the earth...they wouldn't need to take us they can recreate us.. If we had saved the DNA of the Dodo we could have it back again..we just didn't know that at the time..
They could seed other planets from us..
The ark doesn't sound so daft now..size is not the issue.
A zoo of all life found kept as DNA..how long before we make the lego set...build your own Mammoth..create your own Eden..
It would seem all the pieces could be available..
The question now is choice..do we stay as we are or change..(I don't think we have a choice)..it will be forced upon us just because we exist or fade away..
Perhaps the people using cryogenics to save themselves never thought they would be saved as clones..but is it you or another person..
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
I robot..
The first law save the earth..
Second law find a new home..
third law protect life at all cost and recreate it..
Finally protect robot existence to ensure the above three laws..
Then again isn't DNA just data..?<<<save the world on a memory chip..back to the Mammoth.
The universe looks like a simulation a computer program running on an alien super computer..😀 probably running the above laws.
Regards
M. Gregg
The first law save the earth..
Second law find a new home..
third law protect life at all cost and recreate it..
Finally protect robot existence to ensure the above three laws..
Then again isn't DNA just data..?<<<save the world on a memory chip..back to the Mammoth.
The universe looks like a simulation a computer program running on an alien super computer..😀 probably running the above laws.
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
I'm Trying to imagine,
A huge herd of Man made Mammoths on a vast open plain...what a sight to see...
And the 4 wheel drive chasing them for the ivory..<<I struggle to remove the image!
Regards
M. Gregg
A huge herd of Man made Mammoths on a vast open plain...what a sight to see...
And the 4 wheel drive chasing them for the ivory..<<I struggle to remove the image!
Regards
M. Gregg
It's probably not a coincidence, the demise of so many giant species - insect, avian, reptilian, mammalian.
May be but those who tried to hunt rhinos, elephants or hippos with spears didn't usually live to tell the tale.
Particularly hippos are very difficult to kill even with a gun. They weigh 1500kgs (3300lbs) on average, a third of which is its skin.
Hippos kill more people than all other african wildlife put together.
Can't help but think about those who would if given the chance, bring about the extinction of some of us. So far they have not succeeded. However there are those whose disappearance is in the making for hundreds of years and just now beginning their end due to circumstances beyond their control. They say 'what goes around comes around'.
Quote from the wiki about Pleistocene park:
"When air temperature sank to –40 °C (–40 °F) in winter, the temperature of the ground was found to be only –5 °C (+23 °F) under an intact cover of snow, but –30 °C (–22 °F) where the animals had trampled down the snow. The grazers thus help keep permafrost intact, thereby lessening the amount of methane released by the tundra."
- Status
- Not open for further replies.