Re: History of genetic elements?
- From: rem642b@xxxxxxxxx (Robert Maas, see http://tinyurl.com/uh3t)
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 01:55:17 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "g" <gillawton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Forgive my ignorance, but I cannot conceive of how DNA sequences can
> be tracked back through time.
You're definitely ignorant. I presume you never bothered to read
anything I ever posted on this topic, such as these:
http://www.google.com.sa/groups?selm=cpffrm%242ptm%241%40darwin.ediacara.org
http://www.google.com.sv/groups?selm=ffdf399b.0202181215.75e3b6f8%40posting.google.com
Please read those, and then do a Google Groups search to find other
postings I made on the same topic, and read them too, and then tell me
what you think is inconceivable about what I've been proposing for the
past few years that I believe will be entirely feasible ("too cheap to
meter") in about 30-50 years.
> DNA deteriorates fairly quickly in most instances, if I understand it
> correctly, and the conditions necessary for its preservation not only
> would have been necessary at some time between its presence and now,
> but throughout all of that time. Those conditions would be pretty
> stringent. ...
All of that is totally irrelevant to what I proposed. I suggest you try
reading for content instead of playing Eliza by triggering on a few
keywords and then posting a non-thought-out canned response. Please
stop acting as stupid as George W. Bush. Note: GWB is not as stupid as
Dan Quayle was, but he's a close second, and GWB has had more
opportunity for his second-rate stupidity to do a lot more harm than
Quayle's stupidity ever did. Quayle was an embarrassment; GWB a crime.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: entropy and bio-evo
- Next by Date: Re: Issues: A Question Of Integrity (was: Issues)
- Previous by thread: Re: Essay: What is Life?
- Next by thread: What about the Neo-Lamarkism idea ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|