They brought back dinosaurs obviously, Pterosaurs, even Mosasaurs. Why not bring back extinct creatures from other eras of time like mammoths, saber tooths, terror birds, gorgonopsians, etc..?

Really, there are so many cool creatures they are neglecting in favor of creating dangerous hybrids for the sake of innovation.


To "bring a creature back", you have to have its DNA. Don't forget, Jurassic Park was first made possible due to finding a mosquito, preserved in amber, still with the blood of various species of dinosaur. InGen (and anyone else using that method) are limited to the DNA they can extract from the preserved specimens.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Lots of mosquitoes. IGen bought massive quantities of amber to find as many as possible. The in-universe source of dino-DNA is applicable to any extinct species. – Jontia May 5 at 9:05
  • @Jontia Trilobites? ;-) – Matt Gutting May 6 at 16:59

Because dinosaurs are cooler? Let's be honest, if you have to decide between a Smilodon and a Tyrannosaurus, which would you prefer? Sure, the Smilodon is an incredible creature as well, but it's still a big lion-like creature with some giant fangs, so similar to something you would see in a zoo. The same goes for mammoths (giant woolly elephant) and terror birds (big flesh-eating ostrich) as well. The main reason behind the creation of the Indominus Rex, the first hybrid was that after so many years people began to get "bored" of the dinosaurs. The wow! factor was gone, they became a common thing.

CLAIRE: We've been pre-booking tickets for months. The park needs a new attraction every few years in order to reinvigorate the public's interest. Kind of like the space program. Corporate felt genetic modification would up the "wow" factor.

OWEN: They're dinosaurs. "Wow" enough.

CLAIRE: Not according to our focus groups. The Indominus rex makes us relevant again.

Now imagine this if they cloned prehistoric mammals. This would happen much faster with them, meaning less visitors to the park.

| improve this answer | |
  • You are forgetting that elephants are highly intelligent beings whose intelligence level might possibly be equal to that of humans - in short elephants might possibly be people. Furthermore, at least 15 species of prehistoric elephants became extinct in the last 13,000 years, possibly due in part to hunting by humans. So some people might claim that humans have an ethical duty to revive extinct species of elephants. – M. A. Golding May 5 at 15:13
  • 1
    That's a valid point, but then this would be a self generating cycle, because where would you stop? First let's say "modern day", then prehistoric animals hunted by humans, but what's next? The neanderthals? It is assumed that the modern human played a big role in their extinction. The neanderthal may not be as intelligent as modern humans, but they're intelligent in their own ways, so it would probably raise ethical questions regarding them, like can you put them in a zoo, or release them into public? (Actually I read a short story a few years ago, which was about this exactly.) – Razor May 5 at 15:29
  • 1
    @M.A.Golding - Why would you think that the greedy corporate overlords of a theme park would be thinking anywhere along those lines? – Adamant May 5 at 18:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.