Genome editing technology should be utilized in order to bring some extinct species back to life as long as it is well planned. CRISPR is currently being tested in order to correct disease-associated changes in the genome. Scientists are also attempting to treat cancer using CRISPR. If CRISPR can be used to prolong the life of the human race, it should be used to prolong the existence of species that died out too early. However, the wooly mammoth should not be brought back to life because this species went extinct approximately 4,000 years ago. Their original environment in the tundra has drastically changed since then and is still changing today. The best candidates for de-extinction would have to be recently extinct organisms, nothing more…show more content… If extinct organisms are revived for the sole purpose of living in a zoo, then what is the point? Environmental stewardship is included in the principles of global ethics. Global ethics emcompasses the enitre world and by reviving important organisms, they could fix environmental damage that was once considered irreversible. In other words, although reviving extinct species in order to give them a second chance at life seems like a moral thing to do, it would not be truly successful unless they can function on their own in the wilderness. De-extinction can help increase the genetic diversity of organisms on the verge of extinction. We should revive extinct organisms to help the animals and not for human satisfaction. It is important to know that de-extinction can be used for conservation efforts, but there will be no significant progress if people continue to destroy habitats and over hunt animals. There needs to be stricter protection for endangered species and de-extinct species in order to ensure that conservation efforts will not be in vain. In conclusion, although there are many unforeseen consequences of de-extinction, reviving recently extinct species that can benefit the environment is a risk worth
