But that's not the hothead [cnn.com] effect he wanted!

I think maybe nobody's replied to this because they either don't get it and don't want to sound stupid or find it really interesting and don't want to sound like a geek.

Then there's people like me who don't give a shit but don't want that little box to the left to say they only made two posts.

In Response to FacelessSchmuck (#26721):

I think people aren't replying because we don't like to encourage Zamphir.

Also, I don't have time for the level of commitment required to actually click on links.

However, Pruitt's team didn't find the template in the plants' DNA or chromosomes where genetic information is stored and they did not determine whether a particular gene is encoded to carry out the recovery of the normal DNA.

Where the normal genetic template is stored and how it is triggered will take additional research and probably involve more genes, Pruitt said.

Until I see a mechanism for how this works, I remain skeptical.

In Response to jon (#26724):

I remain skeptical

Healthy skepticism is a fundamental part of science.

we don't like to encourage Zamphir
I've been incorrigible for quite a long time.

In Response to zamphir (#26725):

encourage Zamphir
incorrigible Zamphir

Unconstitutional Zamphir?

In Response to jon (#26724):

Duh. Didn't you see Jurassic Park? Nature finds a way.

(beat)

My personal guess is that it has something to do with the discovery that a large part of our genetic makeup is really just a bunch of random garbage. [genome.gov] I'm not sure how much "junk" DNA is in pea plants but I wouldn't be surprised if this is how the plants are normalizing. Most of the "junk" DNA is repeats of the same or similar data, so I'm guessing it's possible that some of those genes might assert themselves somehow during the plant's development, with the junk dna acting like a sort of raid drive.

Of course, I don't know crap about genetics.

In Response to tynic (#26722):

Zamphir needs encouragement?