While I'm on the subject of New Zealand birds, let me link to this from a few days ago: "First the dire wolf, now NZ’s giant moa: why real ‘de-extinction’ is unlikely to fly": "[B]irds are harder to 'de-extinct' than placental mammals. One would need a surrogate egg to bring chicks to term, and for many moa species there are no eggs from living birds big enough to house a developing chick. In this case, artificial eggs would need to be developed.... Genetically engineering a tinamou or any other birds in this group to create a moa hybrid would be... much harder than genetically engineering a grey wolf. And in any case, this would not recreate a moa, but merely something that may look like a moa. As one critic put it, it would not have the mauri (life force) of a moa."
I asked Grok to give me more about "mauri" in this context. From the answer: "As one expert reaction put it, 'Genetic tinkering with the fundamental features of a different life force will not bring moa back,' highlighting that mauri cannot be replicated through science alone; it is an irreplaceable, holistic quality tied to the species' natural history, whakapapa, and place in the ecosystem. This critique underscores broader ethical concerns in de-extinction debates, including cultural heritage, interdependence with nature, and the limits of human intervention in restoring extinct beings."
Mga Post
32 komento:
They're all gone--and there ain't no moa.
A neighbor and former work-colleague is from NZ. He pronounces Maori as 'maw-ree.'
"And in any case, this would not recreate a moa, but merely something that may look like a moa."
there was a sci fi book, back in the 70s or so..
(Larry Niven?)
where the protagonist is munching away on a "Moa" drumstick,
and the protagonist wonders to himself how much like an ACTUAL Moa it was.
Does anyone else remember this?
Maybe the New Zealanders could try to engineer another Kiri Te Kanawa.
RNZ link doesn't go where it's supposed to.
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could brinf back giant terror birds, they didn't stop to think if they should bring back giant terror birds."
Good idea, tcrosse.
"'Genetic tinkering with the fundamental features of a different life force will not bring moa back,' highlighting that mauri cannot be replicated through science alone; it is an irreplaceable, holistic quality tied to the species' natural history, whakapapa, and place in the ecosystem. This critique underscores broader ethical concerns in de-extinction debates, including cultural heritage, interdependence with nature, and the limits of human intervention in restoring extinct beings.""
In another word, nonsense.
Watch out for the kiwi fruit.
@Althouse, your second link produces this error message:
Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist.
And by the way, the morphology and DNA of the skeletons recovered at the La Brea tar pits agree. They weren’t Dire Wolves — they were Dire Jackals .
If it looks like a moa, …
FWIW I’m opposed to bringing back long-extinct species. Today’s environment is nothing like the ecosystems into which they evolved, so whether we’re talking about the Wooly Mammoth, the Dire Wolf (Jackal), the moa, or some strange spider found encased in amber, it will be a totally invasive species in the modern ecosystem.
whakapapa, pukupuku ... I got nothing.
"it will be a totally invasive species in the modern ecosystem."
That's all NZ is now, invasive species (it really is something to see). Time for some balance. Bring back the moa!
Wouldn't moa rides be awesome?
I dunno - I'd settle for bringing back Johnny Carson.
"And in any case, this would not recreate a moa, but merely something that may look like a moa. As one critic put it, it would not have the mauri (life force) of a moa."
Perhaps we could call them Trans-Moa?
Bring back the Moesha! and Maury Povich.
"mauri" in this context... : "As one expert reaction put it, 'Genetic tinkering with the fundamental features of a different life force will not bring moa back,' highlighting that mauri cannot be replicated through science alone; it is an irreplaceable, holistic quality tied to the species' natural history, whakapapa, and place in the ecosystem. This critique underscores broader ethical concerns in de-extinction debates, including cultural heritage, interdependence with nature, and the limits of human intervention in restoring extinct beings."
Or as Bush the father would put it... Not gonna do it, It wouldn't be prudent. Not at this juncture.
"Perhaps we could call them Trans-Moa?"
Yeah. If IT thinks it's a moa, it's a moa. Right?
Link fixed. Thanks
You know who else wanted to recreate vanished beasts, like the European Aurochs? I'll give you two guesses.
New Zealand is trying to kill introduced pine trees. Whole mountainsides full of dying/dead trees. We have witnessed it several places, most recently on Queen Charlotte Sound.
First they tried people injecting the trees by hand (with some kind of poison), but the steepness of the terrain made that difficult in many areas. So they tried shooting poison into the trees with darts and rifles, but that proved ineffective. So they tried lowering workers from helicopters to inject the trees, but the workers came back reporting that, "hey, this is really dangerous!", so now they're spraying from drones.
Maos could kick some ferret ass! Balance.
Moas.
So New Zealand is killing a renewable resource like pine (lumber and paper), using petrochemical herbicides, sprayed indiscriminately. How very, fashionably green. Please tell us they're clearing the land for windmills and solar, for the trifecta.
If there's such a thing as national kharma, the raging forest fires will come soon, followed by the devastating mudslides due to vegetative loss.
"Please tell us they're clearing the land for windmills and solar, for the trifecta."
Nah, just not indigenous.
"followed by the devastating mudslides due to vegetative loss."
You would think. There are whole mountainsides of 100% dead, standing pine trees. We thought it must be an insect blight, but nope.
“ This critique underscores broader ethical concerns in de-extinction debates, including cultural heritage, interdependence with nature, and the limits of human intervention in restoring extinct beings."
Those “extinct beings” (i.e. most of the original megafauna of Australasia) are extinct as a result of human intervention (i.e. the indiginies slaughtered them as fast as they could). That’s their “cultural heritage”.
Anyway, I don’t see the point of bringing back moas. You know they’re just going to taste like chicken anyway.
You'd better run
You'd better hide
You'd better lock your house and keep the kids inside
Here come the twenty first century's latest scam
He's a half a moa and half a man
it is an irreplaceable, holistic quality tied to the species' natural history, whakapapa, and place in the ecosystem. This critique underscores broader ethical concerns in de-extinction debates, including cultural heritage, interdependence with nature, and the limits of human intervention in restoring extinct beings."
In other words, whatever we need it to mean.
Cross T rex and velocipraptors with dogs like German Shepherds and pitters. We'll need them to fight the Terminators when Skynet really gets going.
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.