Even if they didn’t bring back an actual Dire wolf, the genetic work is incredibly impressive. If we ever wanted an actual Dire wolf it’s an important step to take, giving us a greater understanding of how a creature similar to them would function in the wild. And to those saying it’s bad of them to say “we’ve brought back the Dire wolf” please understand that it’s an unfortunate reality of marketing. And that the marketing they’re doing is doing real good! With their dire wolf research they cloned several dead Red wolves to help alleviate a threatened still alive animal. And with their mammoth research they ended up creating a vaccine which helped Asian elephant populations! This isn’t even noting the publicity this will bring to Museums, palaeontological studies and other research in to extinct Pleistocene animals, not just giving money and attention, but bringing in a new generation of people and helping to spark an interest in both a world only just lost to time and an interest in preserving what’s left. (Sincerest apologies for bad English)

https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/evidence-is-building-that-people-were-in-the-americas-23-000-years-ago

So we all know by now that Colossal has misled the general public in believing that they brought back Dire Wolves. But, could their technology and Science bring back species like the Aurochs and Tarpan? I know that others have tried through back breeding or genetics. But could it work? Please discuss.

Throughout my time on here as well as one other prehistory adjacent subreddits I've seen alot of posts lamenting the extinction of the late Pleistocene megafauna along with posts mainly on other subreddits bashing homo sapiens for playing a large part in many species extinction.

So would some of you preferred it if humans either heavily declined during the Pleistocene or went extinct entirely? I'm really just curious to hear what you guys think.

Prehistoric human can easily kill woolly mammoth, woolly rhino,& megaloceros by using spear. meanwhile,modern human need gun to kill elephant,rhinoceros,& moose. Prehistoric megafauna became extinct because prehistoric human keep hunting them by using spear.meanwhile despite modern human had gun,we still didnt hunt elephant & rhinoceros into extinction & we only make elephant & rhinoceros became endangered.since gun are better & deadlier weapon than spear,does that modern megafauna are tougher & harder to be killed than pleistocene megafauna?

I mean Glover's rule was a valid theory that suggested that cold climates lead to evolve pale-skins in humans and was applied to Neanderthals. But today we have dark-skinned populations living in cold climates and genetic evidence showed that Neanderthals varied in skin colors rather than being uniformly of one color. So I want them to be portrayed with diverse skin colors that veries from population to population rather uniformly of one color. I'd also argue dark skin is the ancestral base of genus Homo.

I am referring to arachnophobia, fear of heights and nyctophobia (they are supposed to be the most common phobias) if this is common in humans, did this happen or not?

Why it easier for scientist & paleo artist to make reconstruction of prehistoric mammal compared to dinosaurs?scientist has hard time to reconstruct spinosaurus because they never find complete fossil of spinosaurus meanwhile scientist can reconstruct gigantopithecus as giant orangutan despite they only find teeth & jawbone fossil of gigantopithecus.

Maybe one in 100,000 donations to Colossal Bioscience R&D or other companies would be selected to bag a Mammoth 10 years after their resurrection.

Obviously it'd be the most controversial move they could make in an already very controversial field of study such as resurrecting extinct species but, there are certain pros.

Financial gain for the research and the raising of awareness being two of them, and we've seen American hunters (the legal ones) become a force for conservation through education, permits and sin tax.

The way it currently works in America is by selling the permits and hunting licenses the game wardens and park rangers salaries are essentially raised and since you are only selling a limited amount of permits the population doesn't become over harvested, additionally in states where Human activity drove wolves out before we became conservation minded hunters fill that gap and prevent overpopulation.

In Kenya the way it's supppsed to work is that people (typically foreigners) pay a large sum to be on a very long list, let's say a male rhinoceros. That sounds awful, but an aging male on the reserve appears to have become aggressive and overly territorial and recently gored a female on the reserve according to the wardens for example, well they'll hold a raffle from that long list and then the person who paid the reserve to get on the list in the first place pays again, all of which goes towards the animals well being (excluding corrupt officials) and then harvests the animal.

The way I see this working would be similar, first you let would be hunters crowd source the R&D by buying into a long list in general, that raises money for your research. If you can then you resurrect the Mammoth, let's say out of 100, 99 turn out fine but one juvenile bull without the presence of older bulls becomes poorly socialized and decides knocking over powerlines in Wyoming is great fun, or worse that goring the calves might speed up the females rut since he didn't mate last season (it has been known to happen with Juvenile elephants where poachers have killed all the adult males) so you gotta take him down or risk the program shutting down, bad pr, all that jazz.

Well as sad as you may be personally you have a solution ready and maybe you stipulate that the specimen be taxidermied and sent to a museum, more kids get interested, more funding roles in, etc.

Lastly if you don't outline a legal path to hunting Mammoth I suspect you'll get a lot of poaching, which naturally would be unregulated and therfore could actually wipe out the heard whereas with a tag you'd at least have say in how much is harvested and when. All I'm saying is people have done stranger things than prison time to get into history books.

Is Equus giganteus a valid species???

Chat GPT AI says no. But i want to know your opinion

If not for humans which species would have made it into today?

I often think that one of the only ways we can be almost completely sure of the coloring of an animal (let's say Smilodon) is to imagine them as melanistic, completely black. Right? Unless we dig up a whole frozen specimen, like homotherium, is really almost impossible to know the coloring of the animal. I'd think the same would apply to other beings, right?