Please only answer this if you actually know something about genetics?
338586
your chances are 50% because you must carry the reccessive gene for green/blue eyes.  your mother has green eyes she must carry dominant brown and recessive blue and father's blue eyed.  father has two reccessive blue genes, you have a dominant brown gene and reccessive blue. good luck...u will probabley get green eyed! mix of the two!!
313398
There is no "versus". Mendelian Genetics explained heredity years before when people had funny ideas about inheritance (there was one which said only the father contributed to the children's character and another which said it was the mum!). Biotechnology is using this knowledge as well as knowledge from diverse fields such as Chemistry, Physics, Statistics etc. to modify nature a little for man's benefit. Why the  "versus" question? Both work in tandem.
61787
Possible.\nSeems like a three to five percent chance.\nThe most complete research on the subject is listed below.
81064
No. We don't even have that information for the human species as whole, much less for any individual.\n\nIf you have a few thousand dollars to spend you could get your genome sequenced completely. That stil wouldn't tell you what traits you have and wouldn't even tell you very much about what genes you have. But thatis the absolute best you can hope for.
909881
Though you will ignore the answer, I'll try anyway.  \n\nYour question, with explanation was a classic straw man, so I'll answer your question.\n\nI do not support ID as per se, but, all they are saying is the following:\n\nStep 1:  dna exists.\nStep 2:  later, new dna exists which could not have been eluciadated from existing dna, because there is unquestionably new and unique information in this new dna, which did not exist before.\nStep 3:  how did it happen?  \nStep 4:  it either happened by some still unknown natural or biological mechanism, or it was caused, created.\nStep 5: the natural or biological mechanism seems unlikely as the cause for strictly reasonable and logical reasons.  However, if it could be discovered, it would be one of the most important discoveries ever, and would be communicated as such.  This is still one of the mysteries in biology.  \nStep 6:  new information is not created by natural and random processes.  This just does not occur in nature.  Based on experience and logic.  \nStep 7:  based on the above, it seems that design is involved.\n\nThis is not hard logic.  The point is that you have closed your mind to the issues the ID people are trying to consider, and ID people are fully engaged in science.  What happens if you are wrong?\n\nBasically, ID does not say design is perfect, however, it could very well be optimal, and that takes intelligence, and then it is not a flaw.  ID people have answered your question many times.  Many you need to do some reading.  I cannot say the retina is shoddely wired.  Your remark was a rhetorical and opinionated remark.\n\nNot trying to give you a hard time.  Just the facts.\n\nEdit:  Anything that is proven by science, I agree with.  Duplication is well known.  I hope I was clear.  The issue is:  Here is dna without a certain new function, like a lung, or kidney, or brain, or eye, or skin, of bone, or hair, of tear duct, or immune response, etc.  Later, a 100 lines, or millions of lines of new dna exist with this code.  Duplication is not the mechanism, for the function did not exist, and requires some pretty profound new engineering to create.  The unanswered question is:  how did it happen?  Randomness cannot be part of the solution, since the improbabilities are far too great.  \n\nCan this question be answered, or is it still open?  The answer I usually get is, well just because we do not know, does not mean we should accept the possibility of a creator.  I say, you should consider both, until we have an answer.  You may lean one way or the other, but both are still possibilities.  \n\nThe most knowledgeable scientists agree for example, in cosmology, the closer we get to the beginning of the universe, the more the questions become philosophical and theological.  You are discounting a vital side of the story.
728695
It's called genotype by environment interaction and it's one of the most important principles of genetics.  You really can't say what genetics are "best" without considering the environment and vice versa.  So in short, neither is better, they work together.
490930
black or white or any other color in dominate/recesive genes. Its a gamble really.
96132
There have been hundreds of thousands of such experiments done. Moreover you can easily do them yourself using some nutriemt agar and an incubator with a few hundred dollars to pay someone to do the genetic workup.\n\ntalk.origins is your one stop shop for these types of quetsions. The site is highly reputable, well refernces, cites peer reveiewed science journals and most importantly lists literally hundreds of experimenst that show exactly what you describe.\n\nI've attached a couple link to pages that list a dozenor so such mutation studies, but the site has many hundreds of others.
708035
I can only answer number one.\nThe possible traits can be determined.  But there's no way of know the exact traits of the offspring unless the parents have either two dominate or two recessive genes with every specif trait.  For instance, using punnett square:\n \n----d----d\nD  Dd Dd\nD  Dd Dd\n\nAll the possible genotypes are the same.\nSorry I couldn't answer your other questions!
135811
gene I think is what you are looking for. Not sure the question makes sence.
1072156
I think it's in your genes...but not sure.
726288
Genetic variation or differences would be the primary factor to give this question an explanation.  The same explanation that tells why there are different eye colors, different hair, different skin colors, etc. We inherit our blood type from our parents. Genes on our chromosomes tell the body what type of blood to make.\n\nThe types of proteins, glycoproteins and glycolipids found (or expressed) on the surface of red blood cells define blood types. In addition, blood types, or at least the genes responsible for them, are inherited. Karl Landsteiner described the original blood types - A, B and O - in 1900 and doctors now recognize 23 blood group systems with hundreds of different "types." Many of the blood type antigens (and the antibodies that react with them) have been discovered as a result of transfusion incompatibilities. Some of these molecules have additional functions that are at least as important as conferring compatibility (of lack of compatibility) on transfusion recipients. \n\nThere are four popularly known blood types: A, B, AB and O. These designations refer to the types of sugars (A, B and O) found on the surface of red blood cells. Everyone on the planet has an O sugar, and those who have no other type are known as blood group O. The other group names arise from the fact that some people have A, B or both A and B sugars attached to the O sugar.\n\nThe genetics is unusual in that there are two equally dominant alleles. If the gene from your mother is the recessive allele for producing O cell surface markers, and the gene from your father is for A cell surface markers, then your overall blood type is A. Why? Since everyone has O we only look at the second sugar present to determine blood type. If the gene from your mother was for B and the gene from your father was A, then your blood type would be AB. If both parents donated A alleles, then you would be A. And if both gave you recessive alleles then your blood type would be O.\n\n>> If we have the genes for the A antigen, we will make red blood cells that have A on them.\n>> If we inherit A antigen from both parents or A from one and neither A or B from the other we will have group A blood. \n>>If we inherit B antigen from both parents or B from one and neither A or B from the other we will have group B blood. \n>>If we inherit A antigen from one parent and B from the other we will have group AB blood. \n>>If we inherit neither antigen from both parents we will have group O blood. There is no O antigen. O is the result of not having any A or B. \n>>In addition to our blood group (A,B,AB,O) we can inherit the D antigen. D is more commonly know as the Rh type. This is what is called the positive or negative. Either we have it or we don't. \n>>If we inherit Rh antigen from both parents or Rh from one and not from the other we will have type positive blood. \n>>If we do not inherit the Rh antigen from either parent we will have type negative blood.\n\nThere is no much elaboration on non - ABO blood type as there is only a few who got any of the rare identified blood types.☺
813478
There is no magic number.\n\nIt is not a matter of genetic distance as much as it is number of chromosomes, and other pre- and post-zygotic barriers.\n\nGiven that we are all very genetically close (by the numbers at least) it will be interesting to see what the future brings in the way of hybridization of animals (plants have already been messed with A TON).
844582
Genetics and environment and stuff... oh and gravity! Unless if the tree is on a steep hill.  :-)
531308
i dont think so.  i think they are pretty much genetic because i have seen people who are in good shape that have them.
427517
Something to do w/ genetics............\n\n-Mr. Happy-\n:o)
566012
EEEEH. I'm not really good with this mumbojumbo stuff but here is a site on genotypes and stuff. -> http://janis7hepc.com/Genotypes.htm <-