A Scientist Analyzes Mr. Wyatt's Chromosome
Theory
Dr. Eugene Dunkley, Geneticist
August 1999, England
In regards to the statements made by Ron Wyatt and his
chromosomal analysis: I do not believe that any of Ron's findings or conclusions
will effect the Seventh Day Adventists or their faith. I don't believe that he
had a crusade against the denomination or any denomination for that
matter.
Re his findings-you must remember that Ron was NOT a scientist,
he was an anesthetist. This is not to excuse mistakes in his details, but to
understand more accurately where he was coming from. I sat with Ron
and Derek at D's house in Oxford and Ron explained to me what was done. I filled
in the details in my own mind, knowing that there were holes in what he said,
but not done to deceive, just a lack of knowledge.
Karyotypes are performed all the time. It is a technique in
which the chromosomes are arrested in metaphase by a drug and then stained with
either Giemsa or a reverse stain, and then in this stage are separated and
counted and characterized. There is also a banding pattern associated with each
chromosome pair so that identification of the chromosome is unmistakable.
White blood cells are the only blood cells that can be used for such an
"experiment". Russell's criticism is inaccurate because he omitted
what would have had to happen for the experiment to take place. First, the blood
sample was scraped from the altar. The cells were resuspended in PBS (a
buffer), which allowed the cells to re-hydrate. Then, the cells were
cultured. Only cells with DNA would be able to grow in culture, so there is no
need to "separate" red blood cells, platelets, etc., because they
simply wouldn't be present in a freshly growing culture. These cells were simply
white blood cells in culture (a routine procedure). Next, the cells (or
some of them) would be taken, arrested when the cells were in metaphase (when
the chromosome condense and are visible by microscopy) and stained. Some of the
stains allow light microscopy, but others allow fluorescent microscopy. I
imagine that Ron didn't know one type of microcope from another; he could
use an electron microscope to see the chromosomes, but certainly not to count
them or characterize them. However, that would not detract from the
finding. The karyotype would have been made, and the chromosomes placed in
their proper pairs.
Ron was convinced that the blood of the altar was in fact the
divine blood of Jesus because the chromosome count was 24. If Jesus was
ONLY human we would expect 46. In fact, if he found 46 chromosomes I would have
my doubts because the argument would be that it was simply the blood of a human
being (except of course that the white blood cells were re-vitalized after
almost 2000 years....). Russell is wrong about the frequency of
chromosomal diseases in humans: a number of conditions involving either 47 or 45
chromosomes have been well characterized, besides Turner's, such as Klinefelters,
Down's syndrome, Pateau's syndrome, Cri-de-Chat syndrome, XYY, XXY, etc. and in
fact there was a case in which a young man was found alive with only 24
chromosomes.
You must remember that Ron's inaccuracies in describing this
finding are due to the fact that he did not personally do the experiments or
prepare the cells, because it is not his field of expertise. He simply got the
data and presented it with the understanding that he had. Russell may be correct
about other aspects of the research (I am not an archaeologist), but he himself
is not accurate about the cells and the chromosomes, and his critique suggests
that he is being subjective.
Of course, I only have the description of what Ron said to me,
so I too have no hard data. However, if there is a need to explain this data I
would be happy to do so in defense of the findings. In fact, there are several
more experiments that could be done to further prove what Ron stated. However, I
do not believe that they would be necessary, and in fact would cause a few
problems (especially in this age of cloning, one would conceivably want to clone
the divine chromosome and modify themselves). I do remember that Ron was
reluctant to say anything about the finding, but he felt moved during his talk
at our church, having met with me earlier, to say what he had found. He knew
that I would have some knowledge of the field, and if in fact he thought it was
dodgy he would NOT have said anything because he knew that I would be one of the
few people able to pick it apart. He said it in his sermon knowing that I would
understand it, and I feel to this day that God moved on him to do so that the
finding would be spoken of and would stand the test. This convinces me that
Ron is right....
Courtesy anchorstone.com |