1 posted on
11/13/2002 1:16:37 PM PST by
dead
To: dead
Good article. I'll add it to my collection.
2 posted on
11/13/2002 1:19:58 PM PST by
stanz
To: PatrickHenry
ping
3 posted on
11/13/2002 1:20:40 PM PST by
stanz
To: dead
Excellent!
8 posted on
11/13/2002 2:39:53 PM PST by
Nebullis
To: dead
YEC bump
To: dead
INteresting, but I don't see how it can help in our friendly debates- or all our other debates either!
If a Bison is only 1 acid different from a cow even though a million years separates them, it is not a very precise test. Also, I am pretty sure that there is more than one way to create a given protien. In other words, different genes could make the same protien. All this test measures is the protien, not the gene, so it would miss it when this happened.
14 posted on
11/13/2002 3:15:23 PM PST by
Ahban
To: dead
To show the potential of their technique, Nielsen-Marsh and colleagues sequenced the amino acids in osteocalcin extracted from bones of the extinct steppe bison (Bison priscus) found in permafrost in Siberia and Alaska. Both bones are a minimum of 55,000 years old, the limit of carbon dating. The complete sequences of amino acids exactly matched that of the modern bison (Bison bison).
Doesn't ID predict that these are all randomly different?
To: dead
Boy, AndrewC and gore3000 are gonna be pissed. They've been claiming that fossils can tell us nothing about the critters they used to be.
16 posted on
11/13/2002 3:41:51 PM PST by
Junior
To: dead

.
29 posted on
11/13/2002 4:28:03 PM PST by
aculeus
To: dead
pieces of DNA large enough to sequence using sensitive amplification techniques
36 posted on
11/13/2002 5:58:28 PM PST by
itsahoot
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson