July 9, 2025 • 4 mins
A Otago University professor says extinction is forever and the moa isn't coming back.
A US genetic engineering project with backing from Peter Jackson claims it might restore the extinct South Island moa to New Zealand within a decade.
But zoology professor Philip Seddon says he's questioning the researchers' goal and whether it's even possible.
"Its genetics will be different, its physiology will be different, its behaviour will be different. There's a lot of question marks about whether a GMO version of a moa is actually going to be useful at all."
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You would have seen this in the news today. Massive
story today about this project to bring back the extinct moa,
and it's rustling a few feathers in the world of academia.
The Mammoth project aims to revive the prehistoric animal within
the next decade. I spoke to the company's CEO on
Herald Now this morning and what he told me was
(00:22):
that it's going to take ten years, but it will happen.
These things are massive, three and a half meters tall.
This is the South Island more three and a half
meters tall, and they do it. It's not going to
be exactly the moa. It's going to be a cousin
of the moa that they will edit to look more mourish.
Here he is.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Let's continue to build and build a stage gated process
in where they can be in secure, expanse at ecological
preserves and we can understand how they interact with the
ecology of the existing ecosystem and whatnot, and truly study
them and make them home here again.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Professor Phillips Siddon, University of Otago Zola Department with me
this afternoon. Good afternoon, Hi there, professor, do you like
this idea.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
I think the devil's in the details. Ryan, I think
you've got to dig down. A lot of the word
is about bringing back Moa, but extinction really is forever.
We're not going to see Moya again, No.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Because it's not going to be a real ma is it.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
It's not a real mara. So yeah, it'll be a
genetically modified organism some near relative. And the near relative
for moa are pretty distant. Actually, they're a small flight
at bird in South America.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Yeah, photos of them, the tiny yeah, tiny, sixty million
years difference. So is there anything wrong with doing it?
Speaker 3 (01:48):
Well, you've got to ask why you're doing it, and
you've got to be honest about what you're doing. And
your quote you Ben was being upfront about talking about cousins,
but if you look at the front end media stuff,
it's all about bringing back moa. To all wrapping back
mon I was working on a kind of a tortured analogy.
If I could cheer it with you, I imagine imagine
(02:10):
if someone said would you like the Mona Lisa, and
you went, well, the Mona Lisa. The yeah, the Mona Lisa.
We're going to give you the mon Lisa, and they
give you this painting. You look at it and it's
a it's a woman with a smile, and you think, well,
it doesn't quite look like and you go, is this
really the Mona Lisa And they say, well, no, it's
actually another painting. I don't know, woman girl with the
pearl earring. But we've got some paint, bushes and paint.
(02:32):
We tweaked it and we made it look a bit
like the Mona Lisa. So because it looks like the
Mona Lisa, we're going to call it the Mona Lisa.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
It's awful.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
Thing's wrong with that. It's it's a it's a looker bike.
There's a couple of things wrong with that. It's not
the Mona Lisa. So there's an authenticity about it that's missing.
And the second thing is that you've messed up something
else in order to create that. You've got to say,
just because you can do these things, should you really
be doing it? What's the compelling reason for doing this?
Speaker 1 (03:00):
So the cousin, we mark up the cousin by doing it.
Speaker 4 (03:03):
That's what you're saying, Yeah, you're creating a genetically modified
other species that will have ideally mo like features or
look like a moa, whether it behaves like a moa,
and in the system, we don't know. Genetics will be different,
it's physiology be a different, it's behavior will be different.
So there's a lot of question marks about whether a
(03:25):
GMO version of a mora is actually going to be
useful at all.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
We do use system.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
We do it with plants, so don't wean food?
Speaker 3 (03:34):
Yeah, well, we genetically modified plants or people to use
GMO plants in order to make them kind of grow
better or be resistant to disease and things like that.
And the rationale is that you want more crops that
feed more people.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
Right, so there's a good reason for it. You're saying
there is no good reason here. They say tourism, and
you might get some more. You're just not buying. You
think this is us of bullshit, don't you?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Well I do, and I look at what coloss doing
and you know they're packing the icons of extinction. So
wooly mammoth, Dodo, Tasmanian tiger philacy. Now mo, why wouldn't
you go for moh? And which mow are you going
to go for? Because there are a number of species. Well,
they're going to the biggest one. So this is the
biggest media hit you can do. And if you look
at all the front end stuff, it's saying the MOA
(04:20):
is coming back, it's not. And there's some real questions
about why you're doing this. If you're rationalist tourism, that's
pretty weak source.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
I think Professor Phillipson tell us what you really think.
It's a forgery, you wouldn't do. It's no Mona, Lisa
and basically a bunch of bs.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news Talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio
You would have seen this in the news today. Massive
story today about this project to bring back the extinct moa,
and it's rustling a few feathers in the world of academia.
The Mammoth project aims to revive the prehistoric animal within
the next decade. I spoke to the company's CEO on
Herald Now this morning and what he told me was
(00:22):
that it's going to take ten years, but it will happen.
These things are massive, three and a half meters tall.
This is the South Island more three and a half
meters tall, and they do it. It's not going to
be exactly the moa. It's going to be a cousin
of the moa that they will edit to look more mourish.
Here he is.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Let's continue to build and build a stage gated process
in where they can be in secure, expanse at ecological
preserves and we can understand how they interact with the
ecology of the existing ecosystem and whatnot, and truly study
them and make them home here again.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Professor Phillips Siddon, University of Otago Zola Department with me
this afternoon. Good afternoon, Hi there, professor, do you like
this idea.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
I think the devil's in the details. Ryan, I think
you've got to dig down. A lot of the word
is about bringing back Moa, but extinction really is forever.
We're not going to see Moya again, No.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Because it's not going to be a real ma is it.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
It's not a real mara. So yeah, it'll be a
genetically modified organism some near relative. And the near relative
for moa are pretty distant. Actually, they're a small flight
at bird in South America.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Yeah, photos of them, the tiny yeah, tiny, sixty million
years difference. So is there anything wrong with doing it?
Speaker 3 (01:48):
Well, you've got to ask why you're doing it, and
you've got to be honest about what you're doing. And
your quote you Ben was being upfront about talking about cousins,
but if you look at the front end media stuff,
it's all about bringing back moa. To all wrapping back
mon I was working on a kind of a tortured analogy.
If I could cheer it with you, I imagine imagine
(02:10):
if someone said would you like the Mona Lisa, and
you went, well, the Mona Lisa. The yeah, the Mona Lisa.
We're going to give you the mon Lisa, and they
give you this painting. You look at it and it's
a it's a woman with a smile, and you think, well,
it doesn't quite look like and you go, is this
really the Mona Lisa And they say, well, no, it's
actually another painting. I don't know, woman girl with the
pearl earring. But we've got some paint, bushes and paint.
(02:32):
We tweaked it and we made it look a bit
like the Mona Lisa. So because it looks like the
Mona Lisa, we're going to call it the Mona Lisa.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
It's awful.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
Thing's wrong with that. It's it's a it's a looker bike.
There's a couple of things wrong with that. It's not
the Mona Lisa. So there's an authenticity about it that's missing.
And the second thing is that you've messed up something
else in order to create that. You've got to say,
just because you can do these things, should you really
be doing it? What's the compelling reason for doing this?
Speaker 1 (03:00):
So the cousin, we mark up the cousin by doing it.
Speaker 4 (03:03):
That's what you're saying, Yeah, you're creating a genetically modified
other species that will have ideally mo like features or
look like a moa, whether it behaves like a moa,
and in the system, we don't know. Genetics will be different,
it's physiology be a different, it's behavior will be different.
So there's a lot of question marks about whether a
(03:25):
GMO version of a mora is actually going to be
useful at all.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
We do use system.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
We do it with plants, so don't wean food?
Speaker 3 (03:34):
Yeah, well, we genetically modified plants or people to use
GMO plants in order to make them kind of grow
better or be resistant to disease and things like that.
And the rationale is that you want more crops that
feed more people.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
Right, so there's a good reason for it. You're saying
there is no good reason here. They say tourism, and
you might get some more. You're just not buying. You
think this is us of bullshit, don't you?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Well I do, and I look at what coloss doing
and you know they're packing the icons of extinction. So
wooly mammoth, Dodo, Tasmanian tiger philacy. Now mo, why wouldn't
you go for moh? And which mow are you going
to go for? Because there are a number of species. Well,
they're going to the biggest one. So this is the
biggest media hit you can do. And if you look
at all the front end stuff, it's saying the MOA
(04:20):
is coming back, it's not. And there's some real questions
about why you're doing this. If you're rationalist tourism, that's
pretty weak source.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
I think Professor Phillipson tell us what you really think.
It's a forgery, you wouldn't do. It's no Mona, Lisa
and basically a bunch of bs.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news Talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.