Our mainstream media does it again! On 9 July we have more nonsense, presented as science (Burr, 2025). Apparently, Colossal Biosciences ( https://colossal.com/ ) believes that it can de-extinct the moa within the next decade and that the moa will be alive and walking by 2035.
Apparently, Colossal Biosciences has teamed up with South Island iwi Ngāi Tahu, Canterbury Museum and Sir Peter Jackson to bring the moa back to life. These groups have signed up to a strategic partnership which aims to de-extinct nine moa sub-species, starting with the South Island giant moa. Burr informs us that this situation leaves the door open to resurrect other extinct species too - such as the huia.
Unfortunately, Colossal Biosciences knows very well that bringing any extinct species to life is completely impossible and in effect it has already admitted so in relation to much publicized attempts to recreate the “dire wolf” (Le Page, 2025).
The True Science behind De-extinction
Professor Jerry Coyne explains the problems in more or less the following terms (Coyne, 2025). Attempts to bring back extinct species are scientifically misguided and mis-reported by the press. He says that the press distorts what has been achieved scientifically, and pretends that an animal with only a few cosmetic gene edits is identical to an extinct species.
Changing a living species by editing a few genes to get something that looks like the extinct creature is not the same thing as re-creating the extinct creature. Professor Coyne tells us that extinct species embodied thousands of genetic differences from related modern species, including genes that affect metabolism and behavior. Control regions of genes, which lie outside protein-coding regions, are involved in differences between extinct species and their relatives, but we do not know where these regions are and so cannot use them for genetic editing.
Professor Coyne says that de-extincting species is a cosmetic rather than a serious genetic project, designed to produce animals to “entertain rich people and to wow children”. Such animals, especially the highly touted de-extincted mammoth, which mammoth expert Tori Herridge effectively calls “an elephant in a fur coat” (Science Media Centre, 2025), would certainly not survive in their original habitat.
Comment
Particularly worrying is an assurance from Canterbury Museum’s senior curator, Paul Scofield, that it will happen.
“This will happen. There's no doubt about it whatsoever. This is the world's foremost group of scientists working to this goal now.”
Sorry! It will not happen! The practical challenges are much too great. But the real problem for New Zealand is not only a biased media, but one that is scientifically illiterate, ready to put false ideas into the public domain, and that refuses to publish the considered responses of professional scientists.
Dr David Lillis trained in physics and mathematics at Victoria University and Curtin University in Perth, working as a teacher, researcher, statistician and lecturer for most of his career. He has published many articles and scientific papers, as well as a book on graphing and statistics.
References
Burr, Lloyd (2025). We will ‘de-extinct’ moa within next decade, says US bioscience company
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360750914/we-will-de-extinct-moa-within-next-decade-says-us-bioscience-company
Coyne, Jerry (2025). Dire-ish wolf
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2025/04/08/dire-ish-wolf/
Le Page, Michael (2025). Colossal scientist now admits they haven’t really made dire wolves
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2481409-colossal-scientist-now-admits-they-havent-really-made-dire-wolves/
Science Media Centre (2025). Expert reaction to unpublished preprint on inducing loss of function of genes in mice to produce woolly mammoth- like hair phenotypes https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-unpublished-preprint-on-inducing-loss-of-function-of-genes-in-mice-to-produce-woolly-mammoth-like-hair-phenotypes/
20 comments:
Let these people play and pay for their stupidity games. But I do not one cent of my taxes being spent on this fool’s errand.
Thank you for that clarification. Another Ngai Tahu fraud.
What's most surprising is the total silence of the anti-GE brigade who are normally foaming at the mouth with the slightest GE improvement of crops. The Greens complain that the money should be spent on live species, but they have no problems about the GE. Is that because environmental causes don't matter when an iwi is involved?
'Stupid is as stupid does' - Forrest Gump.
Having watched TVNZ, News @ 6.OOPM, then Seven Sharp (yes sadly i did sit and watch) the question I would pose, is Sir P Jackson being " taken for a ride" by the so called "experts" of Colossal Biosciences?
And now reading this article, me thinks "he is"!
With the existing obesity problem among Maori, imagine what it will be like when KFC uses moa drumsticks instead of chicken.
Absolute nonsense indeed, but good publicity for Peter Jackson. Ironically, re-establishment of moas would give maoris another crack at them; maybe tribal guilt is behind the maori support for this unbelievably silly idea? If they have money for such a moronic idea how about channelling into poor maoris?
Would bringing back Muldoon solve our current problems?
quote-Changing a living species by editing a few genes to get something that looks like the extinct creature is not the same thing as re-creating the extinct creature.
'They'll be creating maoris next?
99.99 percent of all known animal species are extinct. They died out because they could not adapt to the changes in their environment that occurred during the period they roamed the earth. The same goes for other species of Human.
So why the hell would we want to recreate an even more mongrelized failed mutant?
Its cruel enough the inbreeding that goes on with dogs which have to endure a lifetime of suffering via human induced genetic frailties.
I question why some people think it is ok "Labra-doodling" any species?
It seems it just takes a monster to create another.
Blame "Jurassic Park".
I know someone who could knock up an animatronics version that would fool the tourists.
Why bother with the real thing ?
Just another tax write off.....ohh, that's right-they pay s.f.a tax.
Finlayson will no doubt tell them it's quantified under a bit of scribble from the 1800's-spend a dollar, get back $5.
Had a friend who worked for the government in South Australia. They set up a bunch of Aboriginals with an Ostrich farm. My friend was tasked with taking some dignitaries around with an Aboriginal driver to view said farm - they found not one ostrich in 3 days! Yes, they had been eaten. Bring back the Moa and guess what, yep, there are a certain mob that would simply plonk them in a hangi pit.
Meantime let the kids brought up maori style suffer ...
I think ngai tahu should spend their money on bringing back the morioris.......
It's worth saying that some new knowledge may indeed emerge from the proposed work, but we should not kid ourselves that we will bring back species that are long extinct. Given that Colossal Biosciences have admitted to not in fact bringing back other species, how do they explain themselves on this one?
What diligence have Ngāi Tahu, Canterbury Museum and Sir Peter Jackson done before signing their partnership agreement? Will public money be involved, either directly or indirectly? David Lillis
Tasty tasty moa. Settler-colonists since the 13th century have loved tasty tasty moa. Oops: all eaten by c. 1500.
Will they need to change the employment laws to do this, make everyone contractors, rather than employees?
Anon@8.47, that wasn't quite the case for the Moriori. Pity they're not resurrecting them - more especially that they were pacifists and didn't ascribe to utu. A great pity, indeed!
Interestingly, in all-but, Tonga, the rest of the Pacific Islanders called chicken, "Moa". Obviously, well before KFC and Popeyes came to Godzone!
That said, and despite the popular narratives of the purported 'indigenous" and the woke, clearly they were a reasonably easily harvested feast and also further proof that the knowledge and wisdom of "Matauranga Maori" wasn't so flash after all! They obviously had never worked out that their eggs might have been a high-protein food source, nor that they could have bred them for food - in either an egg or hatchling grown form? But then, without pottery, a wheel, nor chickens it seems, their ignorance and rudimentary/primeval knowledge doesn't really surprise. Like most animals, if it was hungry and it moved, kill it.
But then, roll on the 21st revisionist century and anything, it seems, is potentially possible?
Post a Comment