Why don't you come over here and say that to my adamantium claws, bub?

If you have dark eyes and moles on your a body, there's a good chance you carry a mutant gene.

FTFY subby.

wingedkat: If you have dark eyes and moles on your a body, there's a good chance you carry a mutant gene.

FTFY subby.

Probably should have changed that to "nucleus" instead of "body".

It is theoretically possible that something exists without a "mutant gene". However, that something is most definitely not a eukaryote.

I'm not sure it would necessarily be considered alive.

wingedkat: Probably should have changed that to "nucleus" instead of "body".

How about "contain nucleic acids". That will cover everything, from viruses to humans to sequoias, which has genetic mutations. You don't need to be alive in order to mutate. You merely need to be able to replicate, passing on hereditary information into the next generation. Viruses, while usually not considered "alive" (YMMV), do this, and they most certainly mutate. If they didn't, we wouldn't need new influenza vaccines every year.

wingedkat: However, that something is most definitely not a eukaryote.

I'm not sure it would necessarily be considered alive.

The huge majority of life on earth (the Archaea and Bacteria) is not eukaryotic, and it is most certainly alive. You've got probably around 90 trillion prokaryotes living on and in you right now. None of them have nuclei. None of them are eukaryotes. All of them are considered incontrovertibly alive by modern biological definitions.

#occupyeukarya Viruses and Bacteria and Archaea are the 99% :p

;)

If you're not lactose intolerant, you're also a mutant.

"Interestingly, it is more common in (people) with a higher mole count or with darker eye colour," Dr MacGregor said.

"The study's findings are quite alarming, as individuals possessing this genetic variant have a 250% increased risk of developing melanoma."

Higher mole count and or with darker eye colour.

// Reading is fundamental.

Poor #3...

Everybody always gets the cool stuff and I get a rock in my sack, so to speak.



johnson442: What the carrier of a mutant gene might look like:
[www.nndb.com image 236x285]

Grrr, stampa stampa hurrr.

mamoru: How about "contain nucleic acids". That will cover everything, from viruses to humans to sequoias, which has genetic mutations. You don't need to be alive in order to mutate. You merely need to be able to replicate, passing on hereditary information into the next generation. Viruses, while usually not considered "alive" (YMMV), do this, and they most certainly mutate. If they didn't, we wouldn't need new influenza vaccines every year.

hmm, "If you contain nucleic acids" is cutting it too close. Since genes are made up of nucleic acids, you can't have a "non-mutant gene" without nucleic acids, and in theory, there could be something around today which possesses a gene that has never mutated. But it would need nucleic acids to qualify for that.

Viruses are definitely too evolved to qualify. Well probably definitely, since evidence indicates they probably evolved from cells. :P

mamoru: The huge majority of life on earth (the Archaea and Bacteria) is not eukaryotic, and it is most certainly alive. You've got probably around 90 trillion prokaryotes living on and in you right now. None of them have nuclei. None of them are eukaryotes. All of them are considered incontrovertibly alive by modern biological definitions.

#occupyeukarya Viruses and Bacteria and Archaea are the 99% :p

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that prokaryotes are not alive, of course they are alive.

I meant that the theoretical possessor of unmutilated genes could not under any circumstance be a eukaryote, and may or may not be a prokaryote, and therefore may or may not be considered alive.

If it were not be a prokaryote it would not be considered alive by many definitions. I suppose it could be a prokaryote that possesses the unmutated gene, but that may depend on how you define "gene". At some point, like the argument on what it means to be alive, the ability to make a distinction between a "gene" and a "paired string of amino acids" disintegrates.

In any case, it would be pretty difficult to prove that a given string of amino acids is unmutated. I'm not even sure what that would mean, exactly.

Also, another fun genetic mutation - several forms of hypermobility (AKA double-jointedness, at least some hypermobile conditions are genetic).

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: RexTalionis: If you're not lactose intolerant, you're also a mutant.

As a booze-swilling, milk-drinking, dark-eyed, skin-cancer-susceptible, enormously endowed white male who can roll his tongue, I am ok with this.

How YOU doin?

MITF gene, is that the mutation for the MILF gene? Inquiring minds want to know.

Valarius: GreenAdder: Why don't you come over here and say that to my adamantium claws, bub?


I'll just be the comic book nerd and say it.

Wolverine's claws ARE NOT A GODDAMNED MUTANT POWER.

The Canadian military tortured lots of people in its 'Weapon X' programme before they stumbled upon Logan and his actual mutant power of accelerated healing. With that power, and only with that power, did he survive the bonding of a dense metal to his entire skeleton.

Hell, Logan makes a few quips about it from time to time.

"This super collar will deactivate your mutant powers, including your claws! HAHAHA!"

"Yeah. Most people make that mistake."

'SNIKT'

Way to dissect a joke, bub. I bet you're just the belle of the ball at parties.