Changes

The YEC stuff was not touched by the edits of Jrssr5 and I.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 07:00, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

The YEC stuff was not touched by the edits of Jrssr5 and I.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 07:00, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

:For easy reference, here are TimS' links that he added to the article (only the first two of which are currently in the article):

:For easy reference, here are Jrssr5's and TimS' links that he added to the article (only the first two of which are currently in the article):

:* [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/04/12/dinosaur.reut/index.html Bird Family Ties]

:* [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/04/12/dinosaur.reut/index.html Bird Family Ties]

:* [http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/ap_trex_tissues.html T Rex Tissue]

:* [http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/ap_trex_tissues.html T Rex Tissue]

Philip, the first two links were already there, I just added the science publication links.  The difference in what you sourced above with the % sequences is based on DNA squencing, this is protein matching, something alot more difinitive.  Whereas DNA squences are transcribed to RNA and then translated into an aminoacid chain the protein is helped by other proteins to form the final shape.  So the same DNA sequence can be used to produce several different possible proteins.  However, when molecular protein matching is performed the results are far more difinitive, think about how a western blott works.  DeWitt cited another work by the group however his cite did not show what he stated.  No where in the research did the comparisons between humans, frogs and cows was made in the article that he cited.  I know those percentages to be DNA sequence percentages not protein sequences.  Totaly different standards, like comparing apples to oranges.  Check the sources yourself and you can see the difference--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:40, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

Philip, the first two links were already there, I just added the science publication links.  The difference in what you sourced above with the % sequences is based on DNA squencing, this is protein matching, something alot more difinitive.  Whereas DNA squences are transcribed to RNA and then translated into an aminoacid chain the protein is helped by other proteins to form the final shape.  So the same DNA sequence can be used to produce several different possible proteins.  However, when molecular protein matching is performed the results are far more difinitive, think about how a western blott works.  DeWitt cited another work by the group however his cite did not show what he stated.  No where in the research did the comparisons between humans, frogs and cows was made in the article that he cited.  I know those percentages to be DNA sequence percentages not protein sequences.  Totaly different standards, like comparing apples to oranges.  Check the sources yourself and you can see the difference--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 12:40, 14 April 2007 (EDT)