Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
You Said Nothing About Genetic Engineering

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on January 22, 2003 00:42:20 UTC

Typical Pearson response.

If Genetic Engineering is so interesting, why does your post not say something about it.

You did say something about genetically engineered foods. But that is not the definition of GE being used so far on this forum.

You talked about the ethics of cloning, what GEists call copying. But you did not comment on the essential results of GE that copying considerably speeds up the approach to a solution. That is, if the best copies are copied into the next gheneration, then the number of generations to a new solution is considerably reduced.

But for the record let's do it one question at a time:
1) Identical twins are already clones of each other. So we understand completely how clones would be with respect to the parent, with the additional problem of perhaps some physical weaknesses compared to the parent. We do not need to guess.

2) You expressed an opinion. But in GE that is exactly the advantage of copying. So your opinion flys in the face of the results of GE.

3) Who could possibly care about fingerprints. However, the answer to this question is already know from studies of identical twins. But to be honest I do not know or care what the answer is.

4)Genetically engineered foods are not produced by what we are calling genetic engineering. The foods are produced by design. Genetically engineered products are not produced by intelligent design but by blind evolution to a top level set of specs. The amazing thing is that GE products sometimes out perform the best intelligently designed products. You should read this months Scientific American.

Natural foods are safe just because they are genetically engineered. That is not an argument to claim that foods designed by intelligence are also safe. You are confusing two different processes just because they have been given the same name.

Perhaps some day, the genetic makeup of plants can be genetically engineered on a computer. But first the genome of each plant will have to be mapped and the action of every gene will have to be determined. That will not happen for some time.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins