'This Isn't Jurassic Park' New Doc Explores the Science Behind the 'De-Extinction' of Dire Wolves and Other Animals
A new documentary plans to reveal the scientific breakthroughs that made this "de-extinction" possible. De-Extinction premieres July 17 on Curiosity Stream, and PEOPLE has a first look at the trailer for the upcoming project.
The trailer for the documentary opens with a discussion of the "biodiversity problem" facing the Earth — the threat of half the world's species going extinct by 2050.
Some experts who spoke with De-Extinction believe the way to combat this potential crisis is to "dig into the past and bring some of these really important species back."
Colossal Biosciences is pursuing this plan, having already revived the dire wolf using grey wolf DNA, and is working on projects to bring back the giant moa bird and other extinct animals. In the trailer, the woolly mammoth and Tasmanian tiger are also mentioned as candidates for "de-extinction."
The documentary promises to do more than talk about animals from the past. According to De-Extinction, the film aims to show how scientists are bringing back bygone species, and discuss the ethical dilemmas emerging from the advancement of this new field.
"This isn't Jurassic Park. It's real science and real stakes, which can be much messier than people think." John Cavanagh, the doc's executive producer, teased in a statement with PEOPLE.
"This is an incredible breakthrough. Genetic research has let us understand evolution like never before. De-extinction captures the potential of this moment, showing how radical science could shape the future of life on Earth. But it's also a sobering look at what's at stake," he added.
Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.
De-Extinction will take viewers to labs around the world, where researchers are working on a variety of groundbreaking projects that they consider key to protecting the planet's biodiversity.
To learn more about the science that seems straight out of science fiction, tune into De-Extinction available on Curiosity Stream starting July 17.
Read the original article on People
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
This Stunning Meteor Shower Will Illuminate the Sky With Up to 100 Shooting Stars Per Hour
The Perseid meteor shower, caused by debris from Comet Swift-Tuttle, is currently active and will peak on August 12, offering up to 100 meteors per hour. Due to the full moon occurring just days before the peak, moonlight may hinder visibility of fainter meteors, making July 18 to 28 a better viewing window despite fewer meteors. Best viewed in the Northern Hemisphere, the Perseids are visible to the naked eye from dark locations during the pre-dawn hours, with meteors appearing to originate from the Perseus Fourth of July fireworks displays may be long gone, but nature is planning its own sparkling spectacular soon—the annual Perseid meteor shower. It's active right now and will last through late August, according to When viewing a meteor shower, you are seeing pieces of comet debris that heat up and burn as they enter the Earth's atmosphere, resulting in bright bursts of light streaking across the sky. According to NASA, the Perseids occur when Earth passes through the debris left behind by Comet Swift-Tuttle. The Perseid meteor shower is predicted to peak on August 12, when Earth travels through the densest and dustiest part of the comet debris. Per NASA, stargazers can typically see an average of 50 to 100 meteors per hour during this time. These meteors travel at an average of 37 miles per second, making it one of the best meteor showers of the year. Unfortunately, this year's peak takes place just three days after a full moon, so the moonlight may make it difficult to spot fainter meteors, with only the very brightest shooting stars visible. Because of this, you may want to observe the shower from July 18 to 28, when moonlight is at a minimum, suggests Live Science. The rate of shooting stars will be much lower, though. The Perseids are best viewed in the Northern Hemisphere during the pre-dawn hours, though it is possible to see them as early as 10 p.m. To see the light show, head out around 11 p.m. local time (or in the pre-dawn hours of August 11 and 12) to the darkest location you can find. You won't need a telescope or binoculars to see the celestial display, as it's visible to the naked eye. According to NASA, the Perseids' radiant (where the shooting stars appear to originate from) is in the Perseus constellation in the northeastern sky. Meteor showers are named after the constellation from which they appear to emanate. Though Perseus isn't the easiest to find, it follows the brighter, more prominent constellation Cassiopeia, which is known for its "W" or "M" shape that's formed by five stars. Read the original article on Martha Stewart
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Researchers may have solved mystery of Mercury's missing meteorites, but doubts remain
Researchers suspect that two meteorites found in the Sahara Desert in 2023 may originally have come from Mercury, which would make them the first identified fragments of the solar system's innermost planet. The least studied and most mysterious of the solar system's rocky planets, Mercury is so close to the sun that exploring it is difficult even for probes. Only two uncrewed spacecraft have visited it to date — Mariner 10, launched in 1973, and MESSENGER, launched in 2004. A third, BepiColombo, is en route and due to enter orbit around the planet in late 2026. Scientists know little about Mercury's geology and composition, and they have never been able to study a fragment of the planet that landed on Earth as a meteorite. In contrast, there are more than 1,100 known samples from the moon and Mars in the database of the Meteoritical Society, an organization that catalogs all known meteorites. These 1,100 meteorites originated as fragments flung from the surfaces of the moon and Mars during asteroid impacts before making their way to Earth after a journey through space. Not every planet is likely to eject fragments of itself Earth-ward during collisions. Though Venus is closer to us than Mars is, its greater gravitational pull and thick atmosphere may prevent the launch of impact debris. But some astronomers believe that Mercury should be capable of generating meteors. 'Based on the amount of lunar and Martian meteorites, we should have around 10 Mercury meteorites, according to dynamical modeling,' said Ben Rider-Stokes, a postdoctoral researcher in achondrite meteorites at the UK's Open University and lead author of a study on the Sahara meteorites, published in June in the journal Icarus. 'However, Mercury is a lot closer to the sun, so anything that's ejected off Mercury also has to escape the sun's gravity to get to us. It is dynamically possible, just a lot harder. No one has confidently identified a meteorite from Mercury as of yet,' he said, adding that no mission thus far has been capable of bringing back physical samples from the planet either. If the two meteorites found in 2023 — named Northwest Africa 15915 (NWA 15915) and Ksar Ghilane 022 (KG 022) — were confirmed to be from Mercury, they would greatly advance scientists' understanding of the planet, according to Rider-Stokes. But he and his coauthors are the first to warn of some inconsistencies in matching those space rocks to what scientists know about Mercury. The biggest is that the fragments appear to have formed about 500 million years earlier than the surface of Mercury itself. However, according to Rider-Stokes, this finding could be based on inaccurate estimates, making a conclusive assessment unlikely. 'Until we return material from Mercury or visit the surface,' he said, 'it will be very difficult to confidently prove, and disprove, a Mercurian origin for these samples.' But there are some compositional clues that suggest the meteorites might have a link to the planet closest to the sun. It's not the first time that known meteorites have been associated with Mercury. The previous best candidate, based on the level of interest it piqued in astronomers, was a fragment called Northwest Africa (NWA) 7325, which was reportedly found in southern Morocco in early 2012. Rider-Stokes said that was the first meteorite to be potentially associated with Mercury: 'It got a lot of attention. A lot of people got very excited about it.' Further analysis, however, showed a richness in chrome at odds with Mercury's predicted surface composition. More recently, astronomers have suggested that a class of meteorites called aubrites — from a small meteorite that landed in 1836 in Aubres, France — might come from Mercury's mantle, the layer below the surface. However, these meteorites lack a chemical compatibility with what astronomers know about the planet's surface, Rider-Stokes said. 'That's what's so exciting about the samples that we studied — they have sort of the perfect chemistry to be representative of Mercury,' he said. Most of what is known about Mercury's surface and composition comes from NASA's MESSENGER probe, which assessed the makeup of the planet's crust from orbit. Both meteorites from the study, which Rider-Stokes analyzed with several instruments including an electron microscope, contain olivine and pyroxene, two iron-poor minerals confirmed by MESSENGER to be present on Mercury. The new analysis also revealed a complete lack of iron in the space rock samples, which is consistent with scientists' assumptions about the planet's surface. However, the meteorites contained only trace amounts of plagioclase, a mineral believed to dominate Mercury's surface. The biggest point of uncertainty, though, is still the meteorites' age. 'They are about 4.5 billion years old,' Rider-Stokes said, 'and most of Mercury's surface is only about 4 billion years old, so there's a 500 million-year difference.' However, he said he thinks this discrepancy is not sufficient to rule out a Mercurian origin, due to the limited reliability of MESSENGER's data, which has been also used to estimate the age of Mercury's surface layer. 'These estimates are based on impact cratering models and not absolute age dating, and therefore may not be entirely accurate,' Rider-Stokes said. 'It doesn't mean that these samples aren't good analogs for regional areas on the surface of Mercury, or the early Mercurian crust that is not visible on the modern surface of Mercury.' With more modern instruments now available, BepiColombo, the European Space Agency probe that will start studying Mercury in early 2027, may be able to answer long-standing questions about the planet, such as where it formed and whether it has any water. Having material confirmed to have come from other planetary bodies helps astronomers understand the nature of early solar system's building blocks, Rider-Stokes said, and identifying fragments of Mercury would be especially crucial since a mission to gather samples from the planet closest to the sun and bring them back would be extremely challenging and expensive. Sean Solomon, principal investigator for NASA's MESSENGER mission to Mercury, said in an email that he believes the two meteorites described in the recent paper likely did not originate from Mercury. Solomon, an adjunct senior research scientist at Columbia University in New York City, was not involved with the study. The primary reason Solomon cited for his doubts is that the meteorites formed much earlier than the best estimates for the ages of rocks now on Mercury's surface. But he said he thinks the samples still hold research value. 'Nonetheless, the two meteorites share many geochemical characteristics with Mercury surface materials, including little to no iron … and the presence of sulfur-rich minerals,' he added. 'These chemical traits have been interpreted to indicate that Mercury formed from precursor materials much more chemically reduced than those that formed Earth and the other inner planets. It may be that remnants of Mercury precursor materials still remain among meteorite parent bodies somewhere in the inner solar system, so the possibility that these two meteorites sample such materials warrants additional study.' Solomon also noted that it was difficult to persuade the planetary science community that there were samples from Mars in meteorite collections, and that it took precise matching of their chemistry with data about the surface of Mars taken by the Viking probes to convince researchers to take a closer look. Lunar meteorites were also not broadly acknowledged to be in meteorite collections until after the existence of Martian meteorites had been demonstrated in the 1980s, he added, even though the Apollo and Luna missions had returned abundant samples of lunar materials more than a decade earlier. Once samples are confirmed to be from a planetary body, Solomon said, they can provide crucial information not available from remote sensing by an orbiting spacecraft on the timing of key geological processes, the history of internal melting of the body, and clues to planet formation and early solar system processes. Rider-Stokes plans to continue the discussion around these meteorites at the annual meeting of the Meteoritical Society, which takes place in Perth this week. 'I'm going to discuss my findings with other academics across the world,' he said. 'At the moment, we can't definitively prove that these aren't from Mercury, so until that can be done, I think these samples will remain a major topic of debate across the planetary science community.'
Associated Press
3 hours ago
- Associated Press
Book Review: ‘Algospeak' shows just how much social media is changing us
How much has social media changed the way we talk and behave? That's the question linguist and content creator Adam Aleksic sets out to answer in his debut book 'Algospeak.' If you already know what words like 'yeet,' 'rizz,' 'brainrot' or 'blackpilled' mean, some of this information might not come as a surprise to you. Still, Aleksic's analysis reaffirms how this language came about and why it continues to proliferate. For those unfamiliar, it acts as an accessible entry point into social media slang and its evolution. 'Algospeak' touches on a wide array of topics, including in-groups and out-groups, censorship, language appropriation, extremism online, microtrends, clickbait and generational divides. The chapters build on each other with a textbook-level attention to vocabulary. This book serves as a sobering reality check on how social media is affecting not just our speech, but our entire identities. 'Social media creates new identities in order to commodify them,' Aleksic writes in a chapter about microtrends and micro-labels. 'Your decisions are now curated for you under the guise of personalization, while in reality they're engineered to make platforms as much money as possible.' As a self-proclaimed 'etymology nerd,' Aleksic leans heavily into his experience as a content creator, providing a crash course into social media history and how to game the ever-changing and opaque 'algorithm.' His tone is academic, yet approachable, and he's bold but pragmatic in his assertions, exploring counterarguments sufficiently. He identifies the transient nature of language and the algorithm immediately, since the cultural references in 'Algospeak' risk expiring quickly as trends change and social media platforms shift — but that's the point. ''The algorithm' is here to stay. This is why I think it's absolutely worth talking about even the most fleeting words,' Aleksic writes. Aleksic's writing feels personable and knowledgeable as he translates his online presence offline, and in doing so, demonstrates his own claims about parasocial relationships and owning one's audience. Keeping up with the algorithmic cycle is portrayed as exhausting, but as a necessary evil for influencers supporting their livelihoods through social media. 'Algospeak' is a fascinating blend of etymology, psychology, cultural analysis and first-person perspective. The book acts as both a snapshot of our current, social media-imbued society and as an intellectual foundation for language developments to come. Aleksic leaves his reader with questions about the threats and opportunities that stem from social media developments, but undeniably one principle is true: social media has breached containment and is influencing not only the way we talk, but the way we live. 'Algorithms are the culprits, influencers are the accomplices, language is the weapon, and you, dear reader, are the victim,' he writes. ___ AP book reviews:
