[/quote]
I'm wondering about clones and finger prints tho.. I haven't researched it..but I have... doubts.
uh oh
http://www.scafo.org...ary/130501.html[/quote]
Fingerprints are NOT encoded in your DNA, not the SPECIFIC fingerprints you have. Your DNA merely says: thou shalt have fingerprints. Their specific form is stochastic. Bioware got that right.
Identical twins (monozygotic twins) are actually clones of each other. They are TRUE clones that are much more alike than any lab clone is - down to the mitochondrial DNA. Identical. They do not have identical fingerprints.
Also, DNA methylation and other epigenetic modifications are entirely unique and not clonable in their entirety. So there will ALWAYS be real differences.
[/quote]
but. clones are NOT twins.. no matter if even close comparison,it's not etched in stone..like our assumed finger prints are sole depiction of our identities.
If cloned 'exactly' (for the sake of purism;) they'd be identical. If not, then its not a clone at all.
Of course, ah hem, nobody anywhere has actually cloned a human..so it's a moot point..but still, there is room for doubt about clones and finger prints. pe se. Enough for beyond a reasonable doubt type scenario. lol[/quote]
The term "clone" has a specific and clear scientific meaning. Clones are NOT perfect copies the way identical twins are. Human pure clones, down to the last molecule, are called "identical twins". Literally. They are identical in DNA including, as I said, mitochondrial DNA (unlike ANY lab-produced clone of ANY species). They also developed in identical uteran environments, getting hit with male and female hormone pulses at the same time. That being said, if you really analyzed even identical twin DNA you would find that as time passes the DNA modifications diverge such that though the DNA SEQUENCE will be identical, the modifications to it will NOT be identical and thus the expression of the DNA will not be identical.
A clone isn't some bit of magic, it is exactly what has been done in labs with many MANY animals so far (and one day someone WILL clone a human). The cloned human will be less like the template human than an identical twin of that person would be.
[/quote]
From that I'd have to assume the ideal behind actually cloning would be representative of twinning? Thus cloning is really not an aspect at all, as there is not actually any such thing. We've merely copied nature in effectively twinning another, not cloning them. Sheps "clone" would be really an evil twin, so to speak.
I seem to remember a thing/story about humans actually being left and right side twins. As each hemisphere is different from the other. Ever look'it BWS as an interesting dipole of twinning in relation to altered states of DNA?
Modifié par Wayning_Star, 25 mars 2013 - 03:02 .





Retour en haut







