Times Opposes Recreating the Woolly Mammoth

This is quite possibly one of the most idiotic editorials ever written. 

A new research report suggests that scientists may be able to recreate an extinct woolly mammoth from its long-frozen DNA. The most gung-ho scientists think it could be done in a decade or two for as little as $10 million. The deeper question is, should we try?

OK, there are all sorts of biological and ethical reasons why this should be given some real thought before trying it - not to mention the expense for dubious gain.  The editorial makes passing reference to a few of these things, but do you know what the main reason is that we shouldn’t recreate the mammoth?

Global Warming.

The sort of environment it is used to — the frigid wastes of Siberia and North America — are disappearing all too fast.

No one is quite sure why the woolly mammoths died out toward the end of the last ice age, some 10,000 years ago. Theories include warmer temperatures that gradually displaced the plants on which they fed, overhunting by primitive man, an accumulation of harmful genetic mutations, widespread disease, or an asteroid or comet colliding with Earth and disrupting the climate.

If scientists do bring back a few mammoths, we suspect our warming world won’t look any more hospitable than the one that did them in.

What.  The.  Heck.  Do the editors at the Times envision vast herds of woolly mammoths wandering the Canadian tundra?  Is global warming (which hasn’t happened in a decade) going to turn turn Siberia into the Sahara? 

Good grief.  I feel dumber having read that editorial.