De-Extinction

Which sentence most strongly supports the argument in favor of de-extinction in the Point essay?

• “‘We’re calling attention to the extinction threat.’”

• “Since every species is linked to every other one, resurrecting extinct animals may help us control the ravages of global warming and human overpopulation,”

• De-extinction can certainly help restore traditional values, strengthen families, and encourage education.”

• “The first ethical reason for bringing creatures back from extinction is that it helps preserve biodiversity, repair damaged ecosystems, and preserve the world for future generations.”

Which of the following selections most closely states the central idea of the following passage (paragraph 6)?

What about the price tag? A scientific endeavor of this complexity and magnitude may not come cheaply, but it is worth the cost. De-extinction is an ethical use of research funding because it helps us undo harm that humans have caused in the past, such as the appalling slaughter of the passenger pigeon. In his article “The Story of the Passenger Pigeon,” author Clive Ponting notes that passenger pigeons were so common 150 years ago that a hunter could kill 30-40 birds with a single bullet. Soon, the birds were hunted to death for food. On just one day in 1860, over 200,000 birds were killed and shipped from the Midwest to the East. By 1914, a species that had once numbered five billion had been totally eradicated. Don’t we owe it to these harmless, beautiful birds to bring them back?

• Cost is the last thing to consider in a moral argument.

• De-extinction at any cost seems a fair enough repayment for man’s reckless annihilation of creatures.

• Restoring species to the earth is cost-effective.

• The overpopulation of any species encourages mass hunting.

Which of the following best states the central idea of the following passage (paragraph 7)?

Finally, bringing back extinct creatures advances science, which helps us in myriad ways. For instance, people have been critical about the space program since its inception, saying that we would never get anything useful from blasting into the skies. However, in a speech celebrating NASA’s 50th anniversary, NASA administrator Michael Griffin noted that the technology to come out of the space program has greatly improved our lives. Thanks to space exploration, we have weather satellites that warn us of coming storms, heart defibrillators that save lives, personal computers that foster communication, bigger and better crops, and much more. The genome manipulation used in de-extinction research might bring about even more marvels. Maybe these experiments will lead to a cure for cancer or let us live to be 200! We won’t know unless we try.

• A technological advance in one area may lead to unintended discoveries in other areas.

• NASA should spearhead the movement for de-extinction

• De-extinction will definitely improve our lives

• The case for de-extinction is strengthened by the closing statement: “We won’t know unless we try.”

What is most likely the author's reason for including the following passage in the Counterpoint essay?

A scientist cobbles together a creature from old body parts and brings it to life. The scientist is aghast at his creation, a horrific monster. The monster, shunned by the human race, kills his creator’s brother in an attempt to punish his creator. An innocent young girl is convicted of the crime and executed. Can it get any worse? Yes, it can. Fortunately, this story is fiction, the plot of the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley. Make-believe can become reality, thanks to research on de-extinction. De-extinction is immoral, unethical, and dangerous. It should not be pursued.

• To offer a cautionary tale about the horrific potential of tampering with Mother Nature.

• It is meant to suggest that bad scientists should be punished.

• It reveals that Mary Shelley was far ahead of her time in forecasting the dangers of de-extinction

• It shows how innocence is always victimized by mankind.

Which of the following statements about de-extinction is best supported by the Counterpoint essay?

• De-extinction could hasten another Ice Age

• The return of killer-species and the parasites living off them is a double threat to mankind.

• More than 50 million people will die from de-extinction.

• De-extinction would cause there to be too much genetic variety in various species.

With which of the following statements would the author of the Counterpoint essay most likely agree?

• De-extinction is a critical environmental emergency.

• De-extinction is a poor use of available and limited resources

• De-extincting amphibians may add to global warming.

• Dinosaur experts warn against the return of gluttonous reptiles