Интегрированное письмо TOEFL

📖 Текст для чтения

The concept of 'de-extinction'—bringing extinct species back to life through genetic engineering—has gained traction among scientists. Proponents argue that it offers unprecedented opportunities for conservation and scientific advancement. Firstly, de-extinction could restore biodiversity by reintroducing keystone species, such as the woolly mammoth, into Arctic grasslands, which might help combat climate change by preserving permafrost. Secondly, the technologies developed for de-extinction, such as gene editing and cloning, could be applied to save endangered species, improving their genetic diversity and resilience. Thirdly, the process would provide invaluable insights into evolutionary biology and genetics, allowing us to understand how species adapt and why they become extinct, which could inform future conservation strategies. However, critics remain skeptical, but advocates insist that with careful planning, de-extinction is a moral imperative to undo human-caused extinctions.

🎧 Лекция

The lecture challenges the reading's optimistic view on de-extinction. While the reading claims de-extinction can restore biodiversity, the professor argues that reintroducing extinct species into current ecosystems is risky and often ineffective. For example, the woolly mammoth's grassland habitat no longer exists, and modern ecosystems have evolved without them, so their reintroduction could disrupt existing food webs rather than stabilize them. Second, the reading suggests that gene-editing technologies for de-extinction could benefit endangered species, but the professor points out that these technologies are still in early stages, with high failure rates and unintended genetic defects. Resources spent on de-extinction would be better directed toward protecting living habitats and reducing threats like poaching and deforestation, which are more pressing. Third, while the reading highlights scientific insights, the professor counters that de-extinction experiments are limited to a few species and provide only a narrow view of evolution, which can mislead rather than clarify. Moreover, focusing on resurrecting a few iconic species diverts attention from broader ecological crises, making de-extinction a costly distraction rather than a practical solution.