Text 4- The Case Against De-Extinction

What is the primary reason against de-extinction according to the text?

• It is universally opposed by scientists.

• It is technologically impossible.

• It is a misallocation of effort and resources.

• It is a violation of natural laws.

What does the author suggest should be the focus instead of de-extinction?

• Creating new species.

• Developing more zoos and sanctuaries.

• Preventing extinctions by addressing their causes.

• Investing in space exploration.

Why is resurrecting a population like the passenger pigeon considered a monumental project?

• Because there is no interest in bringing them back.

• Because it would need a large number of birds to be viable.

• Because it requires advanced technology not yet available.

• Because it is too costly.

What is a major challenge mentioned for reintroducing species like the passenger pigeon?

• The genetic diversity is too difficult to replicate.

• Their habitats are greatly altered or destroyed.

• Lack of public support.

• Legal restrictions on genetic manipulation.

What does the term 'moral hazard' refer to in the context of de-extinction?

• The risk of creating dangerous organisms.

• The potential for de-extinct species to become invasive.

• The ethical implications of playing God.

• Becoming more willing to take risks because the costs are borne by others.

How does the author view the potential problems of resurrected organisms becoming pests or vectors of diseases?

• As an unfounded fear.

• As an easily solvable problem.

• As the primary concern.

• As a minor concern compared to other issues.

What does the author compare the folly of de-extinction to?

• The use of pesticides in agriculture.

• The idea of geoengineering to combat climate change.

• The risks of artificial intelligence.

• The dangers of nuclear power.

What does the author imply could be a consequence of focusing on de-extinction?

• An increase in efforts to conserve existing species.

• Improved relations between nations.

• A decrease in global warming.

• A distraction from addressing the current mass extinction event.

What is the author's stance on the feasibility of de-extinction?

• Neutral, calling for more research.

• Highly skeptical and critical.

• Supportive under certain conditions.

• Optimistic with reservations.