Can DNA be taken from fossils and be used to create clones of Dinosaurs, Mammoths, etc?
I read about some scientist in Japan who was able to clone mice off some DNA of a frozen specimen. Well, you hear of different species from the Ice Age and the Dinosaur era being found in almost pristine stated (ie, Lyuba, a baby mammoth who was found almost completely intact...), can scientists use DNA off these specimens to clone? Or would the DNA be too old for it? Would scientists really try something as stupid as trying to clone dinosaurs, especially knowing how dangerous they could be?
I've always been interested in dinosaurs and such, which is why I'm asking. It's interesting what scientists can do now a days...
- paul hLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
DNA is a very unstable molecule and research shows that it disintegrates to the point of being unusable for the purpose you question within around 10,000 years. So no, scientists cannot recreate dinosaurs with old DNA. Mammoths purportedly lived until very recently so it might be possible to do that with them but that's a little unlikely as well.
One of the problems with evolution theory is that we DO find evidences of DNA, bacteria amino acids, red blood cells and soft tissues in fossils which "should" be too old to have them remain intact. And we have also found duckbill dinosaurs which were not fossilized at all but more like mummified indicating they lived and died fairly recently. Now those might be possible to clone if we found intact DNA. Another example is that the remains of a small Cadborosaurus were found in the stomach of a whale.
And not all dinosaurs were dangerous...most were about the size of a sheep or large dog and some were as small as chickens...even the giant dinosaurs started off very small. The largest dinosaur egg ever found is about the size of a football. And there are evidences on Incan artifacts known as the Ica stones which show some dinosaurs lived until fairly recent times...some even depict men riding on dinosaurs. Those are just a sample of many evidences which show that man and dinosaurs lived together until fairly recent times....contradicting evolution theory.
Old? DNA, bacteria and proteins...............
A video regarding the Ica stones and other evidences from South America....
Relatively "fresh" dinosaur bones..........
Some links for mammoth related articles....new evidence suggest they lived until around 7600 ?years ago and some evidence shows that they may still have relatives lving in Asia.
"The complete mitochondrial genome sequence of Mammuthus primagenius has been determined, however (J. Krause et al, Nature 439,724-727, 9 Feb 2006). The analysis demonstrates that the divergence of mammoth, African elephant, and Asian elephant occurred over a short time, and confirmed that the mammoth was more closely related to the Asian than to the African elephant.
As an important landmark in this direction, in December 2005, a team of German, UK & American researchers were able to assemble a complete mitochondrial DNA of the mammoth, which allowed them to trace the close evolutionary relationship between mammoths and the Asian elephant."
Pictures of "living"? mammoths in India.....they have no wool or fur like "normal" mammoths but exhibit a large ridge above the head. Perhaps there is a genetic link to mammoths which comes out at times in Asian/Indian elephants....which are closely related to mammoths.
A news story about a Russian attempt to clone mammoths.......
- 5 years ago
I definitly think so. DNA are a set of directions to make something. Although I am unsure if they have figured out how to read the DNA for dinosaurs or mammoth, or wether they have aquired their DNA. I know science has accomplished reading DNA for things like worms, and monkeys. I can't remember if they have "made" any though, I think that is still a work in progress. You will have to do some research. Interview a college biology teacher :)
- 1 decade ago
I don't think so, most of the DNA samples are way to old and are degraded. There would be a lot of important gene sequences missing.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
There is a difference between a fossil and a frozen mammoth.
But the easy answer is NO.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
Only in science fiction books i.e. - Jurassic Park
- 1 decade ago