[Hammond]
                  ROUX FAQ
 

  In all of the below arguments involving "Roux's experiment" you can
see that what THEY ARE ARGUING ABOUT, is whether or not the genetic
material remains "intact" within the daughter cells in cell division,
or whether it is "divided" every time the cell divides.  They went
on for DECADES arguing about this, and it turned out that it DOES
REMAIN INTACT in each cell after cell division, and therefore the
biologists say "Roux was wrong", that the half-embryos he produced
do not have "half the genome" as he thought.
  THE POINT IS, MY USE OF ROUX'S EXPERIMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO
WITH THIS ARGUMENT.  You see, ROUX also proved SOMETHING ELSE by his
experiment, and that is, that the first cleavage of the Egg causes
the bilateral symmetry line of the body.  THIS IS THE IMPORTANT
FINDING IN ROUX'S EXPERIMENT, and it is a finding that was not even
discussed, debated or even CHALLENGED by any of the biologists...
it was simply thought to be of no consequence.  Turns out that it
IS OF MAJOR CONSEQUENCE, since it leads directly to a scientific
proof of God.
  THE proof of this result of ROUX is given by the fact that MOSAIC
eggs WILL PRODUCE 1/2 embryos even when separated, see:

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~browder/cell_fate.html

Where you will find under the heading:

MOSAIC and REGULATIVE Embryos

the following statement:

"E.g. in tunicates, separated blastomeres from the
two cell embryo will develop into half embryos."

in fact will even
produce 1/4 embryos when separated in the 4-cell stage.... OF COURSE
they contain a "complete genome" as Speman and Drench said, but that
is NOT THE POINT HERE, the point is, the first cleavage of the egg
causes the bilateral symmetry line of the body.... whether or not it
contains a "full genome" or not, DOESN'T EVEN MATTER for this
argument (in fact it does contain the full genome).
  Later, by 1905, Conklin had confirmed that separating the 4-cell
stage dorso-ventrally would produce two mirror symmetic dorso-
ventral embryos also.  See also:

http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com/EMBRYO.jpg
and
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com/Fig6.jpg
 

  This is why biologists are wasting their breath arguing with
me, and repeating the litany that "Roux was wrong"....  wrong
about what?  He was RIGHT about the first cleavage causing the
bilateral symmetry line of the body, which is the ONLY ISSUE
relevant to the SPOG.  the SPOG could care less whether the genome
divides, doesn't devide or takes a trip to the Moon... that
is irrelevant to the SPOG.  Biologists are simply a pain in the
neck because they don't even know what the ISSUE IS.

                ROUX FAQ continued

  There are TWO major "results" of ROUX'S experiment, one
has to do with whether or not the genome divides when the cell divides
(which is absolutely no relevance to the SPOG), and the other is
that it proves that the first cleavage of the egg mechanically determines
the bilateral symmetry of the body.  This LATTER FACT is apparently of
little interest to biologists, who are only interested in the
former argument concerning the purported division or no division of
the genome.
  When Biologists say "Roux was wrong" they is referring to Roux's guess
about the division of the genome... a fact which has NO RELEVANCE to
the SPOG.  What HAMMOND is talking about is the 2nd fact discovered by
Roux, and that is that the first cleavage of the egg causes the
bilateral symmetry of the body, and Roux WAS RIGHT ABOUT THAT.  That
is the only thing about Roux's experiment that has any bearing
whatsoever on the SPOG.   And it happens to be TRUE, and ROUX was
the one that discovered it.  End of story.  Biologists are just trying
to throw a wild card into the argument.. or more likely, they don't
even know what the argument is about in the first place.