oh god here comes the globe

It's a simple thing of G-C A-T it's not that hard to sequence

I’d also like to remind everybody that we knew how genes worked long before we discovered the DNA molecule.

(We meaning humanity in this case)

@The18thDoctor yeah u right but the bean monk didn't get it all

we have been manipulated genes in a rudimentary way to create various types of dogs

Yeah I wasn’t just referring to Mendel.

we have a very basic understanding of it

Being able to change genes and understanding how genes work are very, very different things.

and rudimentary is where we are, we are in the 21st century with that limitation on tech, in 1 K years, we will be much much more advanced and have a better understanding of it

We have manipulated genes to grow ears on mice, we have a complex understanding of it

presuming we don't have scientists who create bogus theories that everyone buys

I'm saying we have a rudimentary understanding of it

we don't understand the human brain, we don't understand how to fix DNA defects

Just because you don't know how it works doesn't make it impossible to learn, we know so much but you aren't looking it up

we understand less than we understand

lets presume we know about 2% of how DNA works, your trying to pass that off as a great knowledge

DNA defects are more often than not self correcting in mitosis, however if you are talking about meiosis we can correct there

2% is not alot

less than a slice of a pizza

How do you know it’s that small?

Kevin you aren't reading what I'm saying, you are presuming that you are already correct and saying nonsense

And also knowledge is not a thing you can easily slice up like that. You can’t know how much you don’t know without knowing what you don’t know.

Big Lover, your talking about details of DNA and not paying attention to the bigger picture

your thinking the trees are the entire forest, when they are just a few trees,

You are saying we know nothing about DNA while I explain the details of how much we actually know

I'm not saying we know nothing

I'm saying we know very little compared to what we will know given enough time and not being misdirected

You are ignoting the current understanding in your argument however

in comparison to what we will know in 1,000 years from now, or even 10,000 years from now

We will know more about everting on the future we can't dismiss all knowledge right now

your ignoring that our knowledge on the subject will grow, and that we are in the infancy of our knowledge of it

I'm not dismissing that we know some stuff about it, but we don't know everything or even 5%

if we knew everything, we could do what GOD does, and takes someone's genes and make a person from scratch

no womb, nothing

Kevin what you are saying is that we don't know enough so anything is possible even incest with the tree thing.

I'm saying, this is what we know currently our current extent and the actual future of the subject.

I'm working with speculation based on facts. You are trying to create a fanfiction of biology where you can justify the issue of inbreeding between two people and their children.

no, incest is wrong because it creates negative outcomes in children with genetic defects

I'm saying there was a reason why this didn't occur in the earlier generations and now it does occur

What about gay incest

Between consensual adults

Or incest with contraception