And before you react with references of Jurassic Park, it should be noted that DNA samples only remain useful for about 1 million years, according to the famous geneticist Prof. George Church. Meaning, we have a greater chance at bringing back the Neanderthals (who went extinct over 30,000 years ago) than we would actual dinosaurs that haven’t roamed this Earth for millions of years.

The goal is to collect DNA samples of both endangered and extinct animal species, whereby they’d use them to help increase and stabilize their population numbers. Take the white rhinoceros for example. While tens of thousands of southern white rhinos remain alive, there are only two northern white rhinos that still exist today, both of which are female. The last remaining male northern white rhino had, unfortunatedly, passed away earlier this year after it became gravely ill.

To combat this disaster, scientists are attempting to preserve their population by implanting white rhino embryos into surrogates. While this wouldn’t necessarily preserve full-blooded northern white rhinos, it would ensure that their DNA lives on via whatever hybrids were created in the process. Similar efforts are also being done when it comes to “bringing back” the woolly mammoth, with an estimation of a few years that we’ll finally witness the birth a woolly mammoth-elephant hybrid.

But what does this all entail? If our efforts in preserving the endangered and breathing life back into the extinct are successful, how will we react to such a wondrous accomplishment? In a fascinating article by the BBC, they paint a brief picture of what we should expect:

“A traveller marvelling at snow leopards in a conservation park. A foodie who wants to taste pangolins without breaking the law. A game hunter tracking a black rhino which will be replenished after the kill.”

Obviously, some of these ideas seem downright cruel. If they're sentient creatures, whether cloned or otherwise, they shouldn't be treated as something you harm for the sake of entertainment or because they could be brought back to life soon thereafter. If we were to start cloning humans, would murder then be permissible?

In a future of “extinct animal” zoos, would we treat those animals with care and dignity, using historical hindsight as our guide for what not to do? Or would we ignore hindsight altogether and treat those animals as “less in value,” considering that, no matter what we did to them, they would eventually be brought back?

Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of great ideas for which this tech could help bring into fruition. There’s nothing inherently wrong with the idea of preserving the endangered and reanimating the dead. What matters most is our intentions. Are we doing this simply to make it easier to harm and destroy for our own betterment or are we doing this to help correct our mistakes and create a better, more lively future? How we answer that will ultimately determine whether the future will be wonderful or worrisome.