- the fox is guarding the henhouse again - I wouldn't trust a darwinist to give me facts about darwinism
- in Science vol. 277 July 11, 1997, pp. 176-178. The method used to extract the DNA (on Neanderthals) was the polymerase chain reaction, which on old and damaged DNA is highly error prone.
- I repeat "highly error prone" coyote, but this is no problem for you, since all proofs for darwinism are highly error prone.
Son, I am afraid you have missed some of the details in this process.
PCR, or polymerase chain reaction, earned its inventor a share of the Nobel Prize. Kary Mullis shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Michael Smith in 1993 for this discovery. They don't give Nobel Prizes for junk science.
As Mullis has written in the Scientific American: "Beginning with a single molecule of the genetic material DNA, the PCR can generate 100 billion similar molecules in an afternoon. The reaction is easy to execute. It requires no more than a test tube, a few simple reagents, and a source of heat." Source.
You may not "trust a darwinist to give me facts about darwinism" but you are arguing against 99+% of the world's scientists. (Hint: don't bet the rent money.)
Do you really think the scientists who sequenced the Neanderthal mtDNA just took the first data that popped out? Don't you think they checked it a few dozen times?
Are you aware that DNA labs keep the sequences of their staff on file, so that they can detect contamination?
It really would make for a better argument if you knew what you were arguing about. This is pretty well established science. The details are all over the internet, just waiting for somebody to look and learn.
But I think you have decided that your religious belief supersedes scientific discovery, and you have no inclination to actually learn something. Quote mining is just as good and takes a lot less time.
Fine. But don't confuse your religious belief with scientific evidence.
By the way, you neglected to cite the source for your quote, above,
Its from a creationist website. As such, I would not trust it without confirming the quote against the original article. Creationists have a bad habit of quote mining, and sometimes changing the meaning of quotes by 180 degrees--if it will produce results that they can agree with....in Science vol. 277 July 11, 1997, pp. 176-178. The method used to extract the DNA (on Neanderthals) was the polymerase chain reaction, which on old and damaged DNA is highly error prone
This is dishonest, and its not science. Its apologetics.
This is not a quotation from the Science article, and it completely misrepresents the conclusions of the article. Moreover, more recent research completely supports the 1997 article.