“The Mammoth Cometh” by Nathaniel Rich in the New York Times is an article detailing the prospect of “de-extinction” and how scientists within the community have discussed how improve and begin to understand what new technologies are capable of. “De-extinction” is the term given to the process by which scientists can bring extinct animals, such as the woolly mammoth or great auk, back to life through genetic engineering. To ground the analysis of “de-extinction,” the author focuses in particular on the life of Ben Novak, a scientist, who from a young age showed an incredible passion for bringing the passenger pigeon back to life. The passenger pigeon, once an abundant species, was hunted for its meat as well as sport and sold for its oil and feathers. These practices contributed to the eventual decline from five billion passenger pigeons to complete extinction in just a few decades. The last passenger pigeon died in 1914 at the Cincinnati Zoo. The author goes into detail about how obsessed Novak is with "reviving" the passenger pigeon and quotes a researcher who turned Novak down for a job in a genetic engineering lab because of his fixation. The scientist who ran the lab where he applied to work, Beth Shapiro, said: "I appreciated his devotion to the bird, but I worried that his zeal might interfere with his ability to do serious science." Shapiro questioned Novak's interest and how it could potentially affect the objectivity of his future research in the field. Two key scientists in “de-extinction,” Stewart Brand and George Church, hosted a symposium at Harvard Medical School called “Bringing Back the Passenger Pigeon” in February 2012. In this symposium, Church demonstrated that his… medium of paper... could potentially be given new meaning and context if it were proven to be reversible. Finally, this article touches on inappropriate versus appropriate pathos in scientific argumentation. Novak is considered too busy bringing the passenger pigeon back to life, while the Most other scientists involved in the field do not feel the same level of attachment. Interest is often considered a prejudice, but as far as “de-extinction” is concerned, a field so closely related to ethics and morality, it is dangerous. be biased in bringing back the animals that humanity has helped destroy? Conflicting topic that none of the scientists in this article have touched on is the desire to completely change the direction of the scientific community regarding the issue of extinction to focus their own energy and resources on preventing the extinction of species struggling to survive today..