Unraveling the DNA Myth

Harper's Magazine ^ | February 2002 | Barry Commoner

[MarkWar]

>When a whole article is so shot-through with such flaws, it's hard not to call Commoner an idiot.

When Trotsky got the axe from the Soviets, it didn't mean the Soviets were renouncing socialism. It just meant that Trotsky has outlived his usefulness to their agenda.

When left wing scum like Commoner and Gould denounce this or that materialist dogma, it's not because they've embraced God or anything else beyond materialism. It just means that the particular dogma has outlived its usefulness.

In particular, the mathematics of complexity theory has become so advanced, that left wing scum feel they can make almost all their materialist points scientifically using complexity theory alone. Therefore, they can stop defending the whole biology as gears and levers argument which was becoming more and more difficult...

But I don't believe people like Commoner or Gould ever believe in anything other than materialism and all the generalized anti-Christian consequences which grow from it.

Mark W.

[beckett]

What happens in the real world is that researchers spend years growing dozens or hundreds of generations of test crops, collecting gigabytes of data on their new plants, and only after this careful research is a product marketed.

..."we shouldn't do something until we know all of its consequences,"...

I think a strong argument can be made that in the case of genetic engineering we have great cause to be unremitting hard-asses about putting a concern for "consequences" above all else. Unintended consequences could quite conceivably bring about the end of all lifeforms on the planet.

No matter how many "years" researchers spend "growing generations of test crops" they cannot collapse eons of evolution into a few laboratory experiments. The risks they are taking are dauntingly real and have a direct impact on my life. I'll be damned if I am going to allow them to dismiss my concerns with a condescending pat on the head.

[Doctor Stochastic]

There are far too few human genes to account for the complexity of our inherited traits or for the vast inherited differences between plants, say, and people.

This is stated with no reference nor justification. Having lots of genes, chromosomes, or other genetic material doesn't say much about the complexity of an organism. Aside from that, other people estimate a different number of genes from what Commoner does.

[Phaedrus]

See Footnotes 14 and 15.

[r9etb]

Use yours and understand that not every 100 page article is worth reading when a little common sense does better.

A little common sense would suggest that you read this article -- it suggests that your common sense about DNA may not be correct.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Checked the footnotes before. They don't apply.

If the number of human genes is found to be larger than Commoner supposes, will he retract?

[Phaedrus]

Readers can obtain a list of references used as sources for this article by sending a request to cbns@cbns.qc.edu.

[FreedomPoster]

Okay. Commoner is much more intelligent than Paul Erlich.

LOL! That's pretty much the definition of "damning by faint praise."

[A. Pole]

I think that having left wing nuts like Commoner speak out against cloning [...]

I am losing you. Have you read the article? You can learn a lot from left wing "nuts", right wing "nuts" and center "nuts" if only you have patience to listen.

[A. Pole]

" In short, the most dramatic achievement to date of the $3 billion Human Genome Project is the refutation of its own scientific rationale."

Isn't it amusing how 'science' is always so unscientific.

Negative results can be as valuable as positive ones. Science advances through verification as well as through falsification.

[tiki]

They have to be able to make the bureaucrats understand the grant proposals. Keep it simple, for stupids?

[realpatriot71]

Unintended consequences could quite conceivably bring about the end of all lifeforms on the planet.

Learn how to make a neato beanie here. Put it on. Take a nap. The voices will stop - money back gaurantee.

[beckett]

I get a kick out of people who think only "tin foil hatters" would be unwilling to put the fate of life on the planet into the hands of businessmen who pay big salaries to callow Biology Phds and then use the processes these kids develop for the sole purpose of fattening the corporate bottom line.

Talk about sheep...jeesh.

[realpatriot71]

If you're so convinced transgenic species are going to be the downfall of all the life on this planet, then would you please outline, in a rational manner, how this is going to occur.

I'm also curious as to what your expertise and experience is in biotechnology?

[Phaedrus]

Have you read the article?

Thank you.

[beckett]

By the way, if you're the kind of guy who needs to make an appeal to authority before you know what to think, do a Google on MIT Professor of Microchemistry Rudolf Jaenisch to learn about the very real risks of gene splicing and reassembly.

[beckett]

If you're so convinced transgenic species are going to be the downfall of all the life on this planet, then would you please outline, in a rational manner, how this is going to occur.

I'm also curious as to what your expertise and experience is in biotechnology?

Oh, I get it. The credentialed priesthood --- "rational in manner" one and all --- are the exclusive keepers of the flame.

PULL - EEZE.

[Phaedrus]

From the article:

Most clones exhibit developmental failure before or soon after birth, and even apparently normal clones often suffer from kidney or brain malformations.⁵ ANDi, perversely, has failed to glow like a jellyfish. Genetically modified pigs have a high incidence of gastric ulcers, arthritis, cardiomegaly (enlarged heart), dermatitis, and renal disease. Despite the biotechnology industry's assurances that genetically engineered soybeans have been altered only by the presence of the alien gene, as a matter of fact the plant's own genetic system has been unwittingly altered as well, with potentially dangerous consequences.⁶ The list of malfunctions gets little notice; biotechnology companies are not in the habit of publicizing studies that question the efficacy of their miraculous products or suggest the presence of a serpent in the biotech garden.