this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
384 points (98.7% liked)
Not The Onion
13902 readers
2259 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not really, we humans killed most big land animals that we found as we expanded our territory, back when we were hunters. This happened in big "islands" like Australia and Madagascar, as well as all the small islands. There, large animals had lived in equilibrium for centuries, and their extinction matches some short time after humans arrived. An exception are the galapago islands, as they were discovered in the 19th century.
And to recreate the species they’d need hundreds of them from different genetic material. Which means they’ll likely create a single one that will eventually die and costed billions of dollars.
Besides the fact that the hunting hypothesis is that; a hypothesis, there's a lot of other factors as to why it isn't a good idea. Mainly, ohh idk... The fact that they have had no place in nature in over tens of thousands of years? Even if we managed to create an artificial habitat and role in an ecosystem for them, they would be very vulnerable due to megafauna's increased minimum land requirements because of their size and in danger constantly due to climate change.