Jump to content

Give up yr DNA!


dmuja

Recommended Posts

maybe you should read the Wikipedia article on DNA or some other entry-level article for the lay person, so you can understand what we're talking about here.

 

I'm pretty sure I understand DNA - at least a lot better than you, apparently.

 

 

Your attitude is indicative of the typical lay-person who, when confronted with a scenario that at the surface seems counterintuitive or logically flawed, jumps all over the people discussing it, claims they don't know shit, an refuses to educate themselves.

 

Example: "How the hell can we say that people come from monkeys? If that were true and Darwin is right, then why are there still monkeys?"

 

Or an even more obnoxious example, if only because the purveyors tries to PRETEND to be informed: "If evolutionary theory is correct, why isn't the world currently populated with transitional forms?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

"If evolutionary theory is correct, why isn't the world currently populated with transitional forms?"

 

Everything is a transitional form, wingnut, at least until something better suited to that particular environment comes along.

Even if it already exists, it may take longer than your lifetime for it to become predominant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the word "track" was not used in the context you are using it. DNA obviously can't tell you where a person is. Just where they were.

 

From original post:

The article mentioned that cops were interested in keeping track of siblings of cons

 

Again, how, exactly, will a DNA database help the cops to "keep track" of your siblings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If evolutionary theory is correct, why isn't the world currently populated with transitional forms?"

 

Everything is a transitional form, wingnut, at least until something better suited to that particular environment comes along.

Even if it already exists, it may take longer than your lifetime for it to become predominant.

 

Notice how he uses "wingnut" - apparently for the purposes of discouraging anyone arguing with his flacid, unsubstantiated logic for fear that his namecalling will escalate, thus embarrasing said opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the word "track" was not used in the context you are using it. DNA obviously can't tell you where a person is. Just where they were.

 

From original post:

The article mentioned that cops were interested in keeping track of siblings of cons

 

Again, how, exactly, will a DNA database help the cops to "keep track" of your siblings?

Again, I am asking if anyone else read the article and remembers where is was. Fucking A, give it a rest already.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If evolutionary theory is correct, why isn't the world currently populated with transitional forms?"

 

Everything is a transitional form, wingnut, at least until something better suited to that particular environment comes along.

Even if it already exists, it may take longer than your lifetime for it to become predominant.

 

Notice how he uses "wingnut" - apparently for the purposes of discouraging anyone arguing with his flacid, unsubstantiated logic for fear that his namecalling will escalate, thus embarrasing said opponent.

 

 

Uh, yeah, that's why I did it.....yeah, that's it. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and this part was included in what I read:

 

People who have been convicted of crimes are more likely to have relatives that have been convicted of a crime, which would help the technique be successful. Bieber cited one study in which 30 percent of inmates surveyed said they had a brother who had also been in jail.

 

The study published today used a computer simulation to study how well the technique would work, if generally used. It used data randomly generated based on genetic principles, not information from real databases, meaning the results would have to be verified with real-world data.

 

A computer, the study said, could generate a list of near matches, ranked by how likely those people are to be related to the person whose DNA was collected at a crime scene. One possibility, the study's authors suggest, is to decide on an arbitrary cutoff, giving police access to only those partial matches that exceed a certain likelihood.

 

 

Something about that is just a bit creepy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...