The Dangers of Scientific Discovery

 


As a child I enjoyed comics like The Far Side, Non-Sequitur and even Family Circle.  I loved to watch shows like Law & Order and The Simpsons as well.  There was nothing in particular about any character that drew me in, it was the fact that I wasn’t tied to anything.

There was no worry about missing a panel or missing an episode and being Lost.  There were overarching themes for sure but each comic or show stood on its own merits.  It allowed you to just pop in for one or buckle up for the long haul.

This is the way in which I’ve approached my writing as well.  While the overall theme is building in my faith, I write about what pops into my head or what interests me.

This mentality is the Genesis for today’s writing; Should we be trying to revive any species that have gone extinct.

I read an article about reviving the moa in New Zealand.  This was a land based bird who’s only natural predator was a giant eagle (also extinct) until the arrival of man.

I’ve also read articles and seen documentaries about trying to revive the Woolly Mammoth simply because we think we can.

Those who know me, know that I’m not a big “God’s Plan” guy.  I don’t really subscribe to an overall narrative where everything happens for a reason or where God knows what is going to happen next at all times.

These situations however have always made me nervous.  To replicate or clone or revive animals that did not survive in the world of today, are we really playing God more than we should.  Also, why is it that we only revive the herbivores.  Have we found any Sabre Tooth Cat’s DNA that we could maybe mix with a Lion or Tiger to bring them back?  Are we too afraid to do that but we’re entirely cool with the consequences of plant eaters?

I’m a huge proponent of science and for us to work hard to solve the issues of this world, but is not having enough giant birds or fluffy elephants the best we can work on?  Could these incredible minds and piles of government money not be redirected into something that will help humanity as a whole and this planet that we call home.

I question what the ultimate motivation is of the folks who are working on these projects.  Is it the fame to have their name attached to the project?  Is it the desire to feel that power?  To finally show people of faith that their beliefs are wrong because a scientist can reverse what happened?

In Jurassic Park (the film adaptation of Michael Crichton’s book of the same name) a scientist named Ian Malcolm utters the famous line “your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should.”  While this was paraphrased from the original text (where have I heard that before) and was originally a work of fiction, I think it still has bearing here.

The last 100 years have brought more innovation to the human race than at any other time in history.  One could argue that the last 20-30 we even further advanced than that.

The question then becomes, at what point do morals and rules and common sense come in to play.  This is a real struggle for me if I’m being honest.  I will always support science and I believe that God gave some people the ability to see these things differently.  One day, I’m confident that these scientists will cure cancer and they’ve been able to help to stem a pandemic but they’re also rebuilding long forgotten creatures because of our knowledge of the building blocks of life.

Perhaps I’m the one out of my mind or I’m paranoid, but should we really be working to bring back creatures that have already been rendered extinct in the world we currently live in?  Even if it was our fault, they’ve proven to not be able to survive.

Just because we can, does it really mean we should?


Comments