(November 4, 2016 at 11:08 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote:(November 4, 2016 at 10:29 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: You already know the answer to that is no. The reason their DNA is identical is because they are identical twins. But their DNA, as identical twins, exists no where else in the world. They were never "part of" their mom's body. They are their own separate entity from her, but have the same DNA as each other bc they are identical twins.
They were part of their mom's body originally and also partly their father's sperm originally.
Are they completely separate DNA? Yes.... but the DNA in the left side of my body is also completely separate DNA to the DNA on the right side of my body... it's still all part of me... and originally we were all partly our mother's egg and partly our father's sperm.
It's not her dna. Meaning, it's not her. Also meaning it's not part of her.
Let's say a woman's unborn baby came out of her uterus and committed and crime, and then went back inside her uterus. The detectives found the criminal's DNA at the scene. If they tested the mom, they would conclude that she was not the criminal. Because it was not her DNA they found. It was dna from another person. Person also being another key word here. They can differentiate between the dna of a human and of any other animals/species.
Silly example, but I'm trying to make a point here lol.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
