Thank you for the appreciation of the photo and the thought provoking comment. To me, in line with Darwin's theory, extinction is a natural phenomenon based on 'Survival of the fittest'. So, the species which could adopt to changing environments survived when we had no part to play in it. Bringing the other ones back does not, therefore, make sense to me. I am in a dilemma though on the species which have become or are becoming extinct because of our encroachment on their habitat. I believe that we need to be more conscious and avoid such negative impacts on their environment. However, in a discussion offline today with @the.wild.eye, he made a point that humans, being a species ourselves, are also a part of the whole natural process when it comes to the environment which other species have to face. Therefore, perhaps your point about species need to hack it and survive in today's environment may be valid to some extent. @the.wild.eye also quoted a valid reference of the white moth/black moth classic scenario that has been observed where, after industrialization, the darker mutated moths survived better because they could blend in with soot darkened trees after industrialization. White moths got eaten more by birds because they were more easily spotted due to contrast. Today, even if we were to bring the white moths back, they would still be eaten by birds faster than the black mutated moths.
The only thing I can determine is, it takes a long time for species to adopt. Therefore, I will still support the position that we need to spread the message about conserving the natural habitats so that they can at least survive till they adopt. Does that make sense?