Crichton and the frog DNA

[Martin Baeker <martin@raptor.ifw.ing.tu-bs.de>]

Although I do not want to beat a dead horse, I would like to comment on
this thread, which I could not do before. But I would like to take a
Holtzian attitude and ask you to please read the book before criticizing.

Actually, Crichton did not write in JP that the missing DNa was just taken
from frogs, he was more sensible than that. I quote from my paperback
copy, page 169:
"... were you ever required to include DNA fragments from other species?"
"Occasionally, yes,..., sometimes we included avian DNA, from a variety of
birds, and sometimes reptilian DNA."
"Any amphibian DNA? Specifically, frog DNA?"
"Possibly. I'd have to check."

I think this illistrates nicely how the movie plot reduced a rather clever
and involved plot to something simple (not to use some more impolite
terms that come readily to mind). And for someone who is not a scientist,
I think it was a rather clever plot-idea.


                   Dr. Martin Baeker
                   Institut fuer Werkstoffe
                   Langer Kamp 8
                   38106 Braunschweig
                   Germany
                   Tel.: 00-49-531-391-3073                      
                   Fax   00-49-531-391-3058
                   e-mail <martin.baeker@tu-bs.de>