Why The Dire Wolf "Resurrection" Hype Perfectly Reflects The Blind-Alley Bullshit The PTB Keep Pushing [View all]

The parable of the Mars mission: we’d rather spend trillions sending ourselves to a yet unlivable planet than look after the one we have. And swiftly on its heels, the parable of the dire wolf. We’d rather resurrect a 12,500-year-old species from the dead than save our existing wild animals. Of course we would. Recycling is boring; doing the very thing 90s science fiction movies warned us not to do is fun. We are not quite on the verge of bringing back ancient species. But last week the PR campaign for doing so began in earnest. Colossal Biosciences – a company known for trying to revive the dodo, the mammoth and the thylacine – has unveiled three large adorable white puppies, claiming it has created “the world’s first successfully de-extincted animal”: the dire wolf, made famous by Game of Thrones. It invited author George RR Martin to look; he duly burst into tears.

Scientists have been quick to point out that the company hasn’t done anything of the sort: it has instead created a new animal altogether – a larger, whiter, more muscly wolf. To do so, researchers made edits to the grey wolf genome, and then implanted the resulting embryos in large dogs, extracting them by caesarean section. The puppies look like dire wolves, but what gives the project away is the fact that this is down to just 20 gene edits made on a genome of billions of bases – which makes them closer to the grey wolf than anything else.

EDIT

Two problems stand in our way. First, it is incredibly hard to release captive-bred animals, which do not know how to survive in the wild. Humans have not yet learned to train them in artificial environments – and we may never work out how. Second: there is little point bringing back an animal if we simply drive it to extinction again. Most animals die out because of climate change and the destruction of ecosystems. De-extinction is not an alternative to conservation – we would have to do both.

Which brings us to the most important argument against de-extinction: the “opportunity costs”, or the benefits that could be lost by supporting it. It may be better to spend on the living than the dead. A study published in Nature has calculated that maintaining a population of resurrected animals would be so expensive that two species would die out for every one revived, should the money come out of government conservation budgets. If private money were redirected from de-extinction to conservation, two to eight times more species could be saved. In other words, if Colossal wants to “fix extinction”, its enormous budget and technological genius would be better employed saving orangutans, blue whales and mountain gorillas.

EDIT

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/12/why-resurrect-the-dire-wolf-when-existing-animals-are-facing-extinction