The Supreme Court’s recent decision to allow DNA sampling in most arrests can (hopefully) be used for some good. Look at how many people have been wrongly convicted of crimes they didn’t commit. After spending time in prison they are finally being released. How horrible it must be to spend 10-to-20 years locked up for something you didn’t do?
So, a national data base of DNA samples is a good thing - if it will help put away the really bad guys. Some computer-based samplings of DNA already on file have discovered the real culprit responsible for a crime and allowed the police to lock the real culprit rather than an innocent person behind bars.
Not all DNA sampling is good though, especially when the purpose is to bring back something like the wooly mammoth.
According to a story by reporter Ben Aviss of the BBC Nature News, the recent discovery of a well-preserved juvenile woolly mammoth suggests that ancient humans "stole" mammoths from hunting lions.
A man named Bernard Buigues of something called the Mammuthus organisation reportedly acquired the frozen mammoth from tusk hunters in Siberia, and according to the Aviss story, scientists completed an initial assessment of the animal, known as Yuka, in March this year. Wounds on the animal apparently indicated to the scientists that both lions and humans may have been involved in the ancient animal's death. The only question is who got their first?
Can’t you just imagine a defense lawyer arguing, “But your honor, DNA evidence suggests a lion might have got to that woman first.”
Then we read that some other scientists were talking about cloning the mammoth from its DNA, ala Jurassic Park. But didn’t the cloning experiments of Jurassic Park have disastrous results? (Except at the box office).
Now there’s an article in our morning Olympian from Lisa M. Krieger of the San Jose Mercury News, that Santa Cruz, Ca. scientists think they could possibly bring the once extinct carrier pigeon back by genetically re-engineering its genetic code from old and damaged gene fragments.
Sam and I can’t help wondering why all this re-engineering of genetic material and cloning new animals from old is necessary. A saying in the Bible, “This too shall pass,” although meant to comfort us in times of distress, could well be applied to encourage us to let go of the past and not find out how things used to be by attempting to bring them back to life. This too SHOULD pass.
Bringing dead and extinct animals back to life is not a good thing. Identifying criminals from their DNA is. Sam and I are worried though that eventually there will be a huge national scandal involving the “mix-up” of DNA samples. DNA samples will be “tweaked” by the law enforcement types to prove their cases - just as other evidence is tweaked now. Then DNA proof of a crime will be called into serious question, Supreme Court or no Supreme Court.
You heard it here first.
Three bags of poop on law enforcement tweaking of DNA. But you can bet your George Raft movie poster it will happen.
So, a national data base of DNA samples is a good thing - if it will help put away the really bad guys. Some computer-based samplings of DNA already on file have discovered the real culprit responsible for a crime and allowed the police to lock the real culprit rather than an innocent person behind bars.
Not all DNA sampling is good though, especially when the purpose is to bring back something like the wooly mammoth.
According to a story by reporter Ben Aviss of the BBC Nature News, the recent discovery of a well-preserved juvenile woolly mammoth suggests that ancient humans "stole" mammoths from hunting lions.
A man named Bernard Buigues of something called the Mammuthus organisation reportedly acquired the frozen mammoth from tusk hunters in Siberia, and according to the Aviss story, scientists completed an initial assessment of the animal, known as Yuka, in March this year. Wounds on the animal apparently indicated to the scientists that both lions and humans may have been involved in the ancient animal's death. The only question is who got their first?
Can’t you just imagine a defense lawyer arguing, “But your honor, DNA evidence suggests a lion might have got to that woman first.”
Then we read that some other scientists were talking about cloning the mammoth from its DNA, ala Jurassic Park. But didn’t the cloning experiments of Jurassic Park have disastrous results? (Except at the box office).
Now there’s an article in our morning Olympian from Lisa M. Krieger of the San Jose Mercury News, that Santa Cruz, Ca. scientists think they could possibly bring the once extinct carrier pigeon back by genetically re-engineering its genetic code from old and damaged gene fragments.
Sam and I can’t help wondering why all this re-engineering of genetic material and cloning new animals from old is necessary. A saying in the Bible, “This too shall pass,” although meant to comfort us in times of distress, could well be applied to encourage us to let go of the past and not find out how things used to be by attempting to bring them back to life. This too SHOULD pass.
Bringing dead and extinct animals back to life is not a good thing. Identifying criminals from their DNA is. Sam and I are worried though that eventually there will be a huge national scandal involving the “mix-up” of DNA samples. DNA samples will be “tweaked” by the law enforcement types to prove their cases - just as other evidence is tweaked now. Then DNA proof of a crime will be called into serious question, Supreme Court or no Supreme Court.
You heard it here first.
Three bags of poop on law enforcement tweaking of DNA. But you can bet your George Raft movie poster it will happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment