Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (3616)	3/29/2010 9:55:02 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 69300

<Big deal.> LOL, well it IS if you don't believe in evolution but you like his science... a VERY big deal. As is THIS, if you really thought you were right (or even had a clue) about Gene patents: <Sweet said he invalidated the patents because DNA's existence in an isolated form does not alter the fundamental quality of DNA as it exists in the body nor the information it encodes.- {snip} <"Many, however, INCLUDING SCIENTISTS IN THE FIELDS (my caps) of molecular biology and genomics, have considered this practice a `lawyer's trick' snip> finance.yahoo.com More to come no doubt. Chalk one up for the "EVIL CABAL": <<He said the company deserved praise for what is "unquestionably a valuable scientific achievement," but not a patent because the "isolated DNA is not markedly different from native DNA as it exists in nature."> Huh... imagine that.. can't patent god's design... just like I said. DAK