tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6380025658771305411.post7740365512002247426..comments2008-11-18T10:27:07.572-05:00Peter Davispfdavis@gmail.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6380025658771305411.post-38409824345951586682008-11-18T10:27:00.000-05:002008-11-18T10:27:00.000-05:00Yes, I think it was Einstein who said: <I>Every day, man is making bigger and better fool-proof things, and every day, nature is making bigger and better fools. So far, I think nature is winning.</I><BR/><BR/>So it's important to know when DNA evidence is reliable, and when it's not. But that's how science has always worked. We advance our knowledge a little bit, and that raises new questions and doubts.<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/>-pdPeter Davishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14051525743669602612noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6380025658771305411.post-42306038274730714172008-11-18T00:41:00.000-05:002008-11-18T00:41:00.000-05:00DNA as evidence has worried me ever since I heard about chimeras.<BR/>A chimera could be found guilty when innocent (mother accused of welfare fraud since her children couldn't possibly be hers, because of DNA evidence, but later it's found she IS their birth mother and is a chimera, which explains the DNA difference) and a chimera could be found innocent when actually guilty. DNA isn't foolproof.<BR/>Is there a way around this?Ruth McNally Barshawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10308176951931302853noreply@blogger.com