










Cheney and Obama: It's Not Genetic2. Comment #80584 by bradpitcher on October 22, 2007 at 8:32 am
3. Comment #80589 by jimmm33 on October 22, 2007 at 9:17 am
Bla bla bla genetics bla bla bla...4. Comment #80594 by konquererz on October 22, 2007 at 9:48 am
5. Comment #80597 by pwl on October 22, 2007 at 9:52 am
from what I remember from reading 'the selfish gene' am I right in thinking that although someone gets half of our genes from our father we dont necessarily get a quarter of our genes from his father, or any of our other grandparents?6. Comment #80601 by joekoz451 on October 22, 2007 at 9:58 am
If a single candidate came out as atheist, they would have my vote just for having the balls!
7. Comment #80607 by robotaholic on October 22, 2007 at 10:14 am
8. Comment #80623 by LoneStarTravis on October 22, 2007 at 11:02 am
Obama seems to be a religious person, but he did say that he preferred an evidence-based view of the world than a faith-based view of the world.9. Comment #80626 by Pallinn on October 22, 2007 at 11:09 am
10. Comment #80629 by epeeist on October 22, 2007 at 11:33 am
If I remember my Ancestor's Tale correctly, that sentence is complete and utter nonsense. You inherit exactly half of your father's genes, certainly, but the odds against getting exactly a quarter of each grandfather's genes are astronomical.
11. Comment #80651 by Pete_C on October 22, 2007 at 1:49 pm
The odds of someone being completely unrelated to her paternal-grandfather are quite long. She would have to have been produced from a sperm that carried only non-crossover chromosomes from her paternal grandmother. She obviously gets the X, so that leaves 22 more chromosomes. There's almost always at least one crossover per chromosome pair; we'll simplify and say there was one and only one. So in each pair of chromosomes there are two crossover and two non-crossover chromatids, and for each of these, one is paternal and one maternal. Only one out of the four chromatids is the maternal non-crossover chromatid. So the odds of an X-bearing sperm being produced that lacks all the DNA from the man's father is at best 1 in 4 to the 22nd power, or 1 in 17,592,186,044,416 (the odds are even worse if more crossovers are allowed.)12. Comment #80658 by the izz on October 22, 2007 at 2:16 pm
13. Comment #80670 by hughlomas on October 22, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Obama may be cultivating support with religion, support which he will need to have any chance at winning, but his statements portray him as a secularist.14. Comment #80700 by sornord on October 22, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Perhaps those more knowledgeable in genetics than I am can verify but I recall reading some years ago that at third cousins and beyond a random stranger's DNA will usually show just as much "family relation" to yours...or something like that.15. Comment #80703 by hughlomas on October 22, 2007 at 5:20 pm
everyone is related to everyone else by some degree16. Comment #80710 by Frankus1122 on October 22, 2007 at 6:16 pm
everyone is related to everyone else by some degree
17. Comment #80730 by Pallinn on October 22, 2007 at 8:39 pm
18. Comment #80762 by Nefrubyr on October 23, 2007 at 2:12 am
That may be why many people cannot trace their family tree very far back: perhaps intuitively, they realize they don't share much, genetically speaking, with those distant forebears.
19. Comment #80839 by notsobad on October 23, 2007 at 7:19 am
20. Comment #80988 by MIND_REBEL on October 23, 2007 at 8:40 pm
21. Comment #81089 by bluebird on October 24, 2007 at 3:40 am
22. Comment #83307 by mejdrich on October 29, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Anyone guess why the Cheneys made this public, in the first place?23. Comment #107660 by the_ultimate_samurai on January 4, 2008 at 11:40 pm
hmm, one thing im most curious about in terms of geneology, mitochondrial DNA is never mixed to my knowlege. first off...how OLD is that DNA? mitochondrial DNA moves unchanged from mother to daughter or mother to son, the father makes no contribution to that. how far back does this DNA go? what forces apply to it? can it be mines for anthrolpological evidence?Send a letter to the editor of the original media outlet.
letters@nytimes.com
1. Comment #80579 by Matt7895 on October 22, 2007 at 8:06 am
Other Comments by Matt7895