Your understanding of the science appears to be in need of a little updating.

And Bobby i suppose your going to update me with your extensive knowledge of genetics? Thanks, i look forward to that.

John.

I never said I had extensive knowledge of genetics, though it appeared that your understanding is not based on current science. The rest of the post was intended to help you on a couple of points.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Chris a cloned human being is NOT a physical approximation! Its a perfect copy in every possible way. It just won't have the "memory" of the previous life. The cloned person will be just like your twin. But not all twin babies are identical. But occasionally, you do get identical twins. Your clone will be your twin. So occasionally nature does this anyway! There are lots of identical twins today anyway.

Johnny you're wrong. Setting aside the personality differences resulting from different experiences and memories, while a genetic clone will have identical DNA, it will not necessarily be a perfect copy in every possible way. Identical (mono-zygotic) twins are close to being physically identical at birth, though if separated and raised on different diets and exposed to different environments, will soon start to show physical differences. The reason they're close to physically identical at birth is that they shared a common environment in the womb. Genetic clones of existing people will be different from the DNA donor at birth, as the wombs will be different, and further physical differences will accumulate.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Chris a cloned human being is NOT a physical approximation! Its a perfect copy in every possible way. It just won't have the "memory" of the previous life. The cloned person will be just like your twin. But not all twin babies are identical. But occasionally, you do get identical twins. Your clone will be your twin. So occasionally nature does this anyway! There are lots of identical twins today anyway.

Johnny you're wrong. Setting aside the personality differences resulting from different experiences and memories, while a genetic clone will have identical DNA, it will not necessarily be a perfect copy in every possible way. Identical (mono-zygotic) twins are close to being physically identical at birth, though if separated and raised on different diets and exposed to different environments, will soon start to show physical differences. The reason they're close to physically identical at birth is that they shared a common environment in the womb. Genetic clones of existing people will be different from the DNA donor at birth, as the wombs will be different, and further physical differences will accumulate.

Bobby,
Hmmmmmm......are you going to try to teach me about genetics? Be very careful Bobby, if your going to correct me on matters of genetic engineering, you better be sure about your science. I'm very good with genetics Bobby, i'm not wrong!

John.

---

Chris a cloned human being is NOT a physical approximation! Its a perfect copy in every possible way. It just won't have the "memory" of the previous life. The cloned person will be just like your twin. But not all twin babies are identical. But occasionally, you do get identical twins. Your clone will be your twin. So occasionally nature does this anyway! There are lots of identical twins today anyway.

Johnny you're wrong. Setting aside the personality differences resulting from different experiences and memories, while a genetic clone will have identical DNA, it will not necessarily be a perfect copy in every possible way. Identical (mono-zygotic) twins are close to being physically identical at birth, though if separated and raised on different diets and exposed to different environments, will soon start to show physical differences. The reason they're close to physically identical at birth is that they shared a common environment in the womb. Genetic clones of existing people will be different from the DNA donor at birth, as the wombs will be different, and further physical differences will accumulate.

Bobby,
Hmmmmmm......are you going to try to teach me about genetics? Be very careful Bobby, if your going to correct me on matters of genetic engineering, you better be sure about your science. I'm very good with genetics Bobby, i'm not wrong!

John.

Then please point out the errors in what I posted.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Ok Bobby,

Setting aside the personality differences resulting from different experiences and memories, while a genetic clone will have identical DNA, it will not necessarily be a perfect copy in every possible way

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

Identical (mono-zygotic) twins are close to being physically identical at birth,

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

Genetic clones of existing people will be different from the DNA donor at birth

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

as the wombs will be different, and further physical differences will accumulate.

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

John.

---

Ok Bobby,

Setting aside the personality differences resulting from different experiences and memories, while a genetic clone will have identical DNA, it will not necessarily be a perfect copy in every possible way

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

Identical (mono-zygotic) twins are close to being physically identical at birth,

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

Genetic clones of existing people will be different from the DNA donor at birth

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

as the wombs will be different, and further physical differences will accumulate.

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

John.

Congratulations, you pointed out statements and said they were wrong, you did not point out errors.

Starting with a simple one, mono-zygotic (identical) twins are not physically identical at birth (supporting evidence).

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Congratulations, you pointed out statements and said they were wrong, you did not point out errors.

Starting with a simple one, mono-zygotic (identical) twins are not physically identical at birth (supporting evidence).

Well now Bobby,
I guess God is going to have to check with you first before he starts raising the dead.

John.

Congratulations, you pointed out statements and said they were wrong, you did not point out errors.

Starting with a simple one, mono-zygotic (identical) twins are not physically identical at birth (supporting evidence).

Well now Bobby,
I guess God is going to have to check with you first before he starts raising the dead.

John.

Are you conceding that your understanding of the science is in error?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I hope most here have taken notice of the fact that, although I have expressed my faith as simple belief, and don't engage in much debate about it, neither do I attempt to 'convert' anybody to my own beliefs.

I am not afraid or shy to mention His name....or the way I feel. But I don't feel I need to try to convince others to change what they believe. Everyone's belief structure is the product of the way they were raised, taught, and sometimes a particular event in their life that made them believe, think, and feel the way they do.

That should be respected. Just as I would hope that others would respect the way I feel, even if they cannot see or understand it themselves.

I just got word earlier today that, after 27 weeks of chemotherapy, my love Lori got word from Froedtert hospital that her last test showed her in total remission of HCV, which she has been fighting for years, and had previously failed to achieve a cure on chemo before.

A new drug, Incivek, had a lot to do with it.

But I also strongly believe that my daily prayers on her behalf were granted by God as well. No argument, debate, or other discussion will move me from that belief. I have it fully in my heart and soul, and you shall not wrest it from me.

I suspect others feel the same way.

Meow.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

Ok Bobby,

Setting aside the personality differences resulting from different experiences and memories, while a genetic clone will have identical DNA, it will not necessarily be a perfect copy in every possible way

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

Identical (mono-zygotic) twins are close to being physically identical at birth,

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

Genetic clones of existing people will be different from the DNA donor at birth

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

as the wombs will be different, and further physical differences will accumulate.

This is wrong Bobby! Go check your science before correcting me!

John.

No concession suggests you need further convincing. Mono-zygotic (identical) twins reared apart are similar to each other not identical (supporting evidence). While mono-zygotic twins reared apart are more similar to each other across a broad range of measures than di-zygotic (non-identical) twins, they are not perfect copies of each other. Mono-zygotic (identical) twins are nature's own clones. As nature's own clones raised apart are likely to be subject to very similar societal influences, it would seem reasonable to assume the differences between them will be less than the differences between a donor and his/her clone raised 10's to 100's of years apart.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Some physical, scientifically tested, and peer-reviewed evidence might convert me.

Ancient fairy-tales in a book compiled millennia ago will not.

If God can send me Amanda Righetti in a tutu right this instant, i'll be a convert.
I shouldn't have to pray for it, he's supposedly omniscient, so he knows what i want.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Cloning!
Don't we kind of do that when we procreate?
Hasn't this gotten a bit off topic?

Anyway, believing in a God is a 'faith' thing. Once we have 'proof' of his (or hers Reg!) existence we don't need the 'faith' 'cos we have the real deal.

Converting to or from a 'faith' would follow a human experience which may otherwise be inexplicable to the individual involved.

For me, if I woke up tomorrow and I saw that:-
a) there were no human beings suffering, anywhere, in any way, on this here little blue ball.
b) dental treatment wasn't so expensive even though it is so important.

Then, even if I 'saw' no other proof of it having been caused by a deity, I would believe that we were cared for by a 'God'. And I wouldn't much care who It was or even what colour or how long It's hair was.

So far, I see no reason to believe in the kind of omnipotent being I describe above.

If It's waiting for us to make the right descisions then it is failing. In the main, even we look after our kids pretty well.

With creation comes responsibility.

If God can send me Amanda Righetti in a tutu right this instant, i'll be a convert.

In a tutu? Oh, I can be so much more creative than that, especially with someone like her. ;-D

From a totally selfish point of view it would take a miracle of monsterous proportion. Fix my birth defect/handicap and do the same for every other person born with a crippling afliction. I would then reconsider the evidence.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

If God can send me Amanda Righetti in a tutu right this instant, i'll be a convert.

In a tutu? Oh, I can be so much more creative than that, especially with someone like her. ;-D

Agreed!

Anyway, it didn't happen, ergo there is no god, QED!

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.