Does Colossal Biosciences’ dire wolf creation justify its $10B+ valuation?

Tech Crunch - Apr 8th, 2025

On Monday, Colossal Biosciences announced the successful creation of genetically engineered dire wolves, marking a significant milestone in the field of de-extinction. The company showcased two six-month-old male dire wolves, Remus and Romulus, and a younger female named Khaleesi, all residing in a secretive preserve in the northern United States. These animals were developed using CRISPR technology to edit gray wolf cells with genes extracted from ancient dire wolf fossils, resulting in a 99.5% genetic match. While Colossal touts this achievement as the first revival of an extinct species, many scientists argue that these creatures are more accurately described as hybrids, blending gray wolf and dire wolf traits. Despite skepticism, the company continues to push boundaries, aiming to create more dire wolves and clone endangered red wolves for conservation purposes.

Colossal's ambitious project is part of a broader effort to pair de-extinction with conservation, driven by both scientific innovation and cultural significance. The company has partnered with George R.R. Martin, author of the Game of Thrones series, and engaged with Indigenous communities to explore the potential for re-wilding these animals. The endeavor raises philosophical and ethical questions about what constitutes true de-extinction, while also showcasing Colossal's capabilities in genetic engineering. As the startup seeks to justify its $10.2 billion valuation, it is exploring various revenue streams, including biodiversity credits and artificial womb technology, to sustain and expand its groundbreaking work in species revival and conservation.

Biodiversity Conservation Colossal Biosciences Genetic Engineering De Extinction Ben Lamm Crispr Technology George R.R. Martin Dire Wolves Red Wolves

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article presents a fascinating and timely topic by exploring the de-extinction efforts of Colossal Biosciences to revive dire wolves. It effectively balances excitement with skepticism by including perspectives from both the company and external scientists. The article is well-written and accessible, making it engaging for a broad audience.

While the article provides a good overview of the project, it could benefit from more in-depth scientific explanations and a wider range of expert opinions to enhance accuracy and source quality. The potential ethical and ecological implications of de-extinction are touched upon but could be explored further to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

Overall, the article succeeds in capturing the public's interest and stimulating discussion about the future of biotechnology and conservation. It raises important questions and invites readers to consider the broader consequences of reviving extinct species, making it a valuable contribution to ongoing debates in science and ethics.

Accuracy

The article presents a remarkable claim that Colossal Biosciences has successfully created living dire wolves, which were previously extinct for over 12,000 years. This is a bold assertion that requires substantial verification. The article does provide some evidence, such as the use of CRISPR technology and the comparison of ancient DNA with that of the gray wolf, but does not delve deeply into the scientific methodologies used.

The claim that these creatures are not true dire wolves but rather hybrids or modified gray wolves is supported by the perspectives of external scientists like David Gold and Alexander Young. This adds credibility to the article by acknowledging skepticism and differing interpretations of the scientific achievement.

However, the article's accuracy could be further improved by providing more detailed evidence or references to peer-reviewed studies that support the genetic editing process and the resulting biological characteristics of the animals. The assertion that the dire wolves are 99.5% genetically identical to gray wolves is a specific detail that could be cross-verified with genetic research data.

Overall, while the article makes several verifiable claims, the lack of in-depth scientific detail and reliance on statements from the company and a few experts leaves room for potential inaccuracies or misinterpretations.

Balance

The article does a commendable job of presenting multiple perspectives on the de-extinction of dire wolves. It includes views from Colossal Biosciences, the company behind the project, as well as skepticism from external scientists like David Gold and Alexander Young.

By acknowledging the company's claims and contrasting them with scientific skepticism, the article provides a balanced view of the topic. It allows readers to consider the potential scientific breakthrough while also questioning the extent to which these animals can be considered true dire wolves.

However, the article could further enhance balance by including additional perspectives from other geneticists or conservationists who might have differing opinions on the ethical and ecological implications of such projects. Overall, the article maintains a fair balance between the excitement of the scientific achievement and the critical viewpoints of experts.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, making it accessible to a broad audience. It effectively communicates the main claims and provides context for the significance of the dire wolf project.

The language is straightforward, and the article avoids overly technical jargon, which helps maintain clarity. The use of subheadings and direct quotes from experts also aids in organizing the information logically.

However, the article could improve clarity by providing more detailed explanations of the scientific processes involved in the genetic editing and de-extinction efforts. Overall, the article is clear and easy to follow, but some additional scientific context could enhance reader comprehension.

Source quality

The article primarily relies on statements from Colossal Biosciences and its co-founder, Ben Lamm, as well as external experts like David Gold and Alexander Young. These sources provide a mix of insider and outsider perspectives, which adds credibility to the report.

However, the article could improve its source quality by incorporating more diverse scientific voices, particularly from independent researchers not affiliated with the company. Additionally, references to peer-reviewed studies or scientific publications would strengthen the article's credibility.

The inclusion of George Church, a co-founder of Colossal and a respected figure in genetics, lends authority to the claims, but potential conflicts of interest should be considered given his involvement in the company. Overall, the sources used are credible, but the article could benefit from a broader range of expert opinions.

Transparency

The article provides some transparency about the methods used by Colossal Biosciences, such as the use of CRISPR technology and the genetic comparison with gray wolves. However, it lacks detailed explanations of the scientific processes involved, which could help readers better understand the basis of the claims.

The article does disclose the involvement of George Church and other notable figures, which is important for transparency. However, it could further enhance transparency by discussing any potential conflicts of interest, especially given the commercial and entertainment aspects tied to the project.

Overall, while the article provides some transparency about the company's goals and methods, it could improve by offering more detailed explanations of the scientific processes and potential biases influencing the narrative.