From: "Ted White" <twhite8 at cox.net>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Murder at the Clone Convention
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 21:42:59 -0500
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at keithlynch.net>
To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 8:44 PM
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Murder at the Clone Convention

> "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at keithlynch.net> wrote:
> > Identical twins don't even have the same fingerprints.
>
> "Ted White" <twhite8 at cox.net> wrote:
> > Really?  Even allowing for one mirror-imaging the other?
> > (Mirror-image fingerprints?)
>
> Yes.  See http://www.forensic-evidence.com/site/ID/ID_Twins.html
>
> I've never heard of mirror-image twins.  "Situs inversus" (mirror
> image of normal internal layout) occurs in only about one in ten
> thousand people, and has nothing to do with whether they have an
> identical twin.

Greg and Jim Benford are mirror-image identical twins.   I've known them
for many years -- since they were teenagers.  We've discussed aspects of
their "twinness" over the years, but never their fingerprints.

> > Are you suggesting that clones would *also* have differing
> > fingerprints?
>
> Yes.  Identical twins *are* clones.
>
> Nothing about clones is identical *except* their DNA.  Of course
> they're going to be more similar to each other than two randomly
> chosen people.

You're saying that one's fingerprint is not spelled out in one's DNA, then?
It occurs arbitrarily and by chance?

--Ted White