Hey from Massachusetts ^^
- Thread starterLisa
- Start date
Basicly we rolled a swab in our cheek, swished it out into a test tube, added chemicals to break down the cell (but not DNA) spun it in a centrifuge to get all the cell parts to sink to the bottom into a pellet. Then we took and added a bit of alchohol to the top, and the DNA lifts up into the Alchohol layer (it is not dense compared to other stuff in the cell) and you can lift it out in a white glob with a thin metal rod. Then it was simply a matter of putting it in a charm filled with distilled water and sealing the charm. (ok, ya, that was the really dumbed down version, but that is the basic idea) It was actually one of the easier labs we did. We did so many labs in that class.... it was crazy! (we ran electrofloureses gells and made things that look just like the DNA charts you see on CSI and those type of shows, we even took a field trip to Cold Spring Harbor laboritories (setup and run by eather watson or Crick (i forget which), one of the two men to discover the shape of DNA! on this field trip we even got to sequence our own DNA!!!
Let me know if you want to know more!
Let me know if you want to know more!
Lisa
Member
@ Peter - that's so cool! We were supposed to do that lab, I think [I read through the lab manual in my spare time, once, not like I'm a geek or anything ^^ ] and it outlined a similar prodecure. 
I'll inquire on it later. We just did a shark dissection, which was somewhat interesting, I suppose, and earlier we did a fly breeding lab, which was also interesting. ^^ Right now we're doing a bunch of evolutionary stuff, so really there isn't a good lab for that [Stir, let sit for 10 million years.]
Lisa
I'll inquire on it later. We just did a shark dissection, which was somewhat interesting, I suppose, and earlier we did a fly breeding lab, which was also interesting. ^^ Right now we're doing a bunch of evolutionary stuff, so really there isn't a good lab for that [Stir, let sit for 10 million years.]Lisa
LoL "Stir, let sit for 10 million years" hehe I completely disagree with evolution, (and on all my tests on evolution I would write out what I felt to be the right answer (creation) with undenyable factual backing evidence, and pointing out holes in the evolutionary approach (then add a paragraph at the end something like "However, even with all of the above evidence, the commonly accepted explination for this is.....")
It was lots of fun, and it drove the teacher crazy b/c she couldnt refute any of it, and yet was a fairly strong believer in evolution. (and she was good enough not to get upset with me, we are good friends (and infact today after school, we had a hard time getting work done b/c we were talking about random stuff too much)).
It was lots of fun, and it drove the teacher crazy b/c she couldnt refute any of it, and yet was a fairly strong believer in evolution. (and she was good enough not to get upset with me, we are good friends (and infact today after school, we had a hard time getting work done b/c we were talking about random stuff too much)).
Peter said:
Kiwi pride makes me correct a common misconception. lol. Everyone thinks of Watson and Crick as the only two people involved in the discovery of DNA. This is incorrect. There was a third person on their team, Maurice Wilkins - a New Zealander. He shared in the Nobel prize for discovering DNA. I must admitt I didn't know about Mr Wilkins involvement until last year when he died and his obituary was on the National television news. Other scientists ideas also contributed to the discovery of DNA.
While researching this post I came across the below link, which has a simple method for extracting DNA from a Kiwi Fruit
that might be of interest of some of you biologists. Please note I haven't tried this.http://www.ba-education.demon.co.uk/for/science/dnamain.html
A yes, but you are forgeting one more person! Rosalind Franklin, probably one of the least appreciated people in science, she took the X-rays refraction images which her partner (John Randall) then took without her permission (b/c he felt he was her supperior although he wasnt) and passed them (along with her unpublished ideas) on to Watson and Crick who were able to use them to reach their conclusion about the shape of DNA.
(My Bio Teacher is obsessed with this lady and she would yell at me for quite a while if she ever found out that i was talking about this subject and didnt mention Rosalind Franklin!)
(My Bio Teacher is obsessed with this lady and she would yell at me for quite a while if she ever found out that i was talking about this subject and didnt mention Rosalind Franklin!)
Lisa
Member
Peter said:
Hehe!
We should talk sometime - what is it you don't believe in about evolution? [Again, just curious, not one of those "I hate religion people." ] . . . Did your teacher grade you down? I guess it's good if you're all friends, Seeing as teachers grade up for that. ^^
Lisa
The teacher didnt grade me down for it b/c I gave the "what 'science' says" answer too (while still discrediting it).
What dont I believe about evolution, well... where to start.... ah yes: EVERYTHING There is no conclusive evidence for it and there is MORE evidence for creation, but 'science' blinds its self from the obvious answer b/c it was explained before they got there. If you want a lot of good reading, check out http://www.answersingenesis.org (there is another website too, but i cant remember it right now off the top of my head.)
Feel free to ask more specific questions, I have probably had to already answer them, and dont mind doing it again.
What dont I believe about evolution, well... where to start.... ah yes: EVERYTHING
There is no conclusive evidence for it and there is MORE evidence for creation, but 'science' blinds its self from the obvious answer b/c it was explained before they got there. If you want a lot of good reading, check out http://www.answersingenesis.org (there is another website too, but i cant remember it right now off the top of my head.)Feel free to ask more specific questions, I have probably had to already answer them, and dont mind doing it again.
Lisa
Member
@ Peter - I'll definitly check out the website.
I'm a hardcore believer in evolution, so I don't want to get into an argument that might be offensive to either of us. ^^ I've seen both sides: parents are ridiculously Christian, and I love science, and I guess evolution just makes more logical sense to me.
Anyway, thanks again!
Lisa
I'm a hardcore believer in evolution, so I don't want to get into an argument that might be offensive to either of us. ^^ I've seen both sides: parents are ridiculously Christian, and I love science, and I guess evolution just makes more logical sense to me.
Anyway, thanks again!
Lisa
lisa said:
That's kinda funny b/c i dont find evolution logical at all, too many "well we guess there were animals "inbetween" these others" I am a VERY logical person (Exceling in math, doing horrible in english, not buying a car b/c it's to expensive in the long run even though I have the $$ right now...)
I guess I would just suggest you take some time and read more about creation, and maybe you'll see the logic i see in it (and how the evidence fits creation perfectly). Unfortunatly they dont tell you about creation in school so you only get one side of the story, so obviously everyone thinks that side makes sense!
I dont think there is much oppinion about it. I am not really sure what you mean by what my oppinion is about animals going extinct... Animals do go extinct, many of them probably went extinct during the Great Flood of Noah's Day. As far as animals getting here, they were created in the first seven days (as written in Genisis 1). There are comonalities between animals because all animals that we know live on a common earth, and God gave them common, effective tools.
I am not sure if i am answering your question or not.... but.... ya, let me know if i am not
I am not really sure what you mean by what my oppinion is about animals going extinct... Animals do go extinct, many of them probably went extinct during the Great Flood of Noah's Day. As far as animals getting here, they were created in the first seven days (as written in Genisis 1). There are comonalities between animals because all animals that we know live on a common earth, and God gave them common, effective tools. I am not sure if i am answering your question or not.... but.... ya, let me know if i am not
Lisa
Member
Peter said:I dont think there is much oppinion about it.
I am not sure if i am answering your question or not.... but.... ya, let me know if i am not
You are.
Do you believe in microevolution? As in - there are moths that blend into brown bark, but during the industrial age the tree bark gets darker, so the brown moths die off and are replaced with darker mothes?Lisa
I believe God made animals to be flexable to their surroundings. That is quite abit different then an entire new animal coming from nowhere. Am I a different person in the summer when I go out and get a sunburn? nope (at least I hope not!) ok, ya that was a really bad example, but I think you might get the idea.
propmonkey
Well-Known Member
if evolution took place then why are there still monkeys around??
i just happen to read these last 2 posts.
im agnostic, i beleive in god and though i beleive in him i belive in evolution some. i belive he started every thing and started evoluton and guided it.
i just happen to read these last 2 posts.
im agnostic, i beleive in god and though i beleive in him i belive in evolution some. i belive he started every thing and started evoluton and guided it.
Similar threads
