Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

486
https://i.ibb.co/tqWWnjX/image.jpg Picture on the left is a microscope image, so how do they end up with the result on the right?

https://i.ibb.co/tqWWnjX/image.jpg

Picture on the left is a microscope image, so how do they end up with the result on the right?

Yes
No
Fuck You!

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

Related my teacher taught us in 9th grade science that they cloned "Dolly the sheep" and it was super controversial.

Was that a hoax?

Why is that the first and last time we've heard of cloning?

[–] • 1 pt

AFAIK they really did clone the sheep, the reason it was big news was that it was one of the first animals successfully cloned to live for any appreciable amount of time. It still didn't have a normal lifespan and had a whole bunch of other stuff wrong with it IIRC. Nowadays with enough money you can get your dog cloned.

[–] • 0 pt

Because cloning isn’t for the goyim. The shabbos goys may get a chance but not the rest of you.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

remember viruses used to be diamond shaped with a long neck and spidery legs, like some kind of space probe?

[–] • 1 pt

yep i remember that...

it went from this https://pic8.co/sh/HvT3Ug.jpg

to this https://pic8.co/sh/JyyEQq.jpg

[–] • 1 pt

That top one looks like a bacteriophage, which I guess is technically a virus, maybe?

[–] • 0 pt

I mean... Phages target bacteria and viruses generally arget eukaryotes... But they all replicate virally... So...

I'm still confused/annoyed that viruses aren't considered alive. They evolve, so I'd say yes, but I'm in the minority on that one.

It's truly mind boggling the diversity in the viral types. It makes sense with their relative simplicity, and life cycle, but still. Damn complicated.

[–] • 0 pt

You should see DNA when it isn't organized. It looks kind of like a ball of knotted Christmas lights.

[–] • 0 pt

link/source?

[–] • 0 pt

Go back to reddit if you don't know how to boolean search.

[–] • 0 pt

Boolean search is long dead on most search engines. Why not just post a source when you make a claim?

[–] • 0 pt

200 nm, nano meters? For it to look anything like the artist's rendition on the right, we would need better magnification. As in, we would need to be able to see protons, neutron, and electrons through a microscope, better. We're not quite there yet, if we ever get there.

[–] • 0 pt

DNA is fake and gay, just more jew manipulation

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

You gotta magnify the left more.

[–] • 0 pt

I Jewgle'd it and it said this

With an optical microscope having a high numerical aperture and using oil immersion, the best possible resolution is 200 nm corresponding to a magnification of around 1200×

it says 200 nm in the left pic

[–] [deleted] • -1 pt

Right...just because our best magnification is 200nm, that doesnt mean that is the best possible magnification. We are restricted to technology... God can magnify it better. Obviously the picture on the right is just a representation of what better magnification would show.

[–] • 0 pt

You’re one special type of retard

[–] • 0 pt

thread had 5 people vote "yes" within a span of a few minutes

[–] • 0 pt

You can literally see the double helix

[–] • 0 pt

X-ray crystallography