Random Bones thoughts

joybrennan wrote:f

bailey wrote:Watching Stargazer in a Puddle ...

When they needed to proof that Max was Max. Why didn't they just test Brennan's DNA to match it to his? They had proof she was his daughter, right? Or at least I don't think either her or Max would've denied it even in this circusmtance.

I guess maybe they did this on purpose to say that Booth wouldn't put her in that situation?

Remember, Brennan's identity was changed also. It wouldn't prove his true identity - it would prove he was Max Brennan.

Oh, that is true. Lol I totally wasn't thinking about it that way. Thanks! It makes much more sense to me now, I've thought about that every time I've seen that episode.

bailey wrote:

joybrennan wrote:f

bailey wrote:Watching Stargazer in a Puddle ...

When they needed to proof that Max was Max. Why didn't they just test Brennan's DNA to match it to his? They had proof she was his daughter, right? Or at least I don't think either her or Max would've denied it even in this circusmtance.

I guess maybe they did this on purpose to say that Booth wouldn't put her in that situation?

Remember, Brennan's identity was changed also. It wouldn't prove his true identity - it would prove he was Max Brennan.

Oh, that is true. Lol I totally wasn't thinking about it that way. Thanks! It makes much more sense to me now, I've thought about that every time I've seen that episode.

you're right and I get what you mean, but it would have proved he was Matthew Brennan instead of Max Keenan.

After watching the movie Star Trek way too many times this weekend and seeing how well they handled certain continuity issues, I don't understand how Television shows, like Bones, can let things slip. It seems so easy... and yet... I suppose if Bones could use the excuse of alternate timelines... and time-space continuums. What did happen to Russ? Or Goodman?

dawnsfire wrote:I'm sure they still needed a warrant to collect Max/Matthew/Art's DNA when he was brought in if he didn't offer it up voluntarily, regardless of reason. That blood sample from the 1978 robbery could have been compared to Brennan's, though, but I think all it would have proved is that she was some blood relative. Don't know enough about the law or DNA testing to be sure.

Hmph. Going to have to rewatch that.

DNA could've proved that she was his daughter instead of just some sort of relative. That's how paternity testing works, right?

Also, I think that in a few states that all people arrested have to offer a DNA sample upon processing. Although I did get that information from another TV show. Lol.

But still going back to how you explained it before ... even if they compared Brennan's DNA to the old sample, it still just proves she's related to that person and not Max. They had to link it directly somehow.

I'm so confused now. Lol.

dawnsfire wrote:

bailey wrote:

dawnsfire wrote:I'm sure they still needed a warrant to collect Max/Matthew/Art's DNA when he was brought in if he didn't offer it up voluntarily, regardless of reason. That blood sample from the 1978 robbery could have been compared to Brennan's, though, but I think all it would have proved is that she was some blood relative. Don't know enough about the law or DNA testing to be sure.

Hmph. Going to have to rewatch that.

DNA could've proved that she was his daughter instead of just some sort of relative. That's how paternity testing works, right?

Also, I think that in a few states that all people arrested have to offer a DNA sample upon processing. Although I did get that information from another TV show. Lol.

But still going back to how you explained it before ... even if they compared Brennan's DNA to the old sample, it still just proves she's related to that person and not Max. They had to link it directly somehow.

I'm so confused now. Lol.

Paternity testing doesn't work the way everyone thinks it does, or so I am told. It won't say a man is the father, but rather if he isn't. So comparing Brennan's DNA to Max's will say he could be her father, not that he is. (I have the impression maternity testing is far more accurate)

Don't ask me more--I know nothing! Nothink!

Ahh, if there's anything an analyst likes more than a technical discussion it's a technical discussion where he can spout off. both Baily and my Queen have it somewhat right, but not entirely.

When DNA tests for paternity are done they are autosomal tests (that means the DNA contains genetic information from both parents). Autosomal tests attempt to match alleles (gene sequences) from one sample to another. The testing itself is destructive (the sample is destroyed in the process) and results in the DNA strands being broken up into their 23 constituent chromosomes, each with one allele). When they actually do the paternity test they're matching alleles from the potential father to the child, looking for degree of match, commonality, and polymorphic deviation. Testing does two things, it identifies if the person being tested is related, then it determines the degree of relation.

So what does that all mean? Well it means that they could have tested Max's DNA and proven that yes, he was Brennan's father. Then if they could match that to a previous DNA sample (one they had on file, like the blood on the napkins) then yes, they'd have him cold. But there are issues with testing 30 year old DNA that's been stored at room temperature in a plastic baggie - hey, it was 1978, they didn't do DNA tests then, they tested for blood type so they were less concerned with cross contamination of samples. Who's to say how it was collected or stored? Add in the fact that some autosomal testing can have as much as a 15% error rate and it's far from a silver bullet. For example, a DNA test can prove paternity to a reasonable degree but past that you can't tell an uncle from a brother or a sister from an aunt.

They needed a warrant to get a fresh DNA sample from Max to prove he was the one who left the contribution at the crime scene. Testing Brennan would only prove that she was related to Max, but at the time Max wasn't Max, he was Arthur McGregor from Coos Bay, Oregon and they had no legal right to take DNA from him. That also brings up the whole mandatory DNA contribution thing. He wasn't arrested in any state during that episode, he was brought in for questioning by the FBI, state laws governing DNA sampling wouldn't apply (Federal, not State authority and he wasn't under arrest at the time), so no warrant, no sample and no sample, no arrest.

RM

Ah, I love the smell of fluorescing alleles in the morning...

THX1138 wrote:

So what does that all mean? Well it means that they could have tested Max's DNA and proven that yes, he was Brennan's father. Then if they could match that to a previous DNA sample (one they had on file, like the blood on the napkins) then yes, they'd have him cold. But there are issues with testing 30 year old DNA that's been stored at room temperature in a plastic baggie - hey, it was 1978, they didn't do DNA tests then, they tested for blood type so they were less concerned with cross contamination of samples. Who's to say how it was collected or stored? Add in the fact that some autosomal testing can have as much as a 15% error rate and it's far from a silver bullet. For example, a DNA test can prove paternity to a reasonable degree but past that you can't tell an uncle from a brother or a sister from an aunt.

Thank you. I was fairly certain they could prove he was her father but my knowledge of DNA testing comes solely from watching Law & Order, so I know idea how it worked.


Ok -- bone to pick now. In the episode the Cindrella in the Cupboard when Wendell says Brennan will be upset that he can't get conventional x-rays of the body so he borrows the fluroscopy machine ... He's not using a fluro machine. It's a portable x-ray machine which would only provide the type of films that Wendell had already said he wasn't able to get. He was right about needing a fluro unit though. Disappointing, they usually get that type of stuff right.


Edited to keep from double posting. I'm home from work today with a virus and bored. Watching Fire in the Ice ... I love the little scene where Booth gets sent to the penalty box, and he's pissed. But then Bones waves at him (and she's so cute when she does it), and he looks at her and smiles and waves back. It's just adorable. It's like, once he sees her, all his anger just melts away. Kinda the same thing in CitC when he's searching all over for her with his eyes while being prepped for surgery, and his eyes light up when he sees her.

Ok, back to being sick now. Lol.

Have you ever noticed how much Booth smooths down his tie? I wonder if that's a subconscious David habit...

THX1138 wrote:

dawnsfire wrote:

bailey wrote:

dawnsfire wrote:I'm sure they still needed a warrant to collect Max/Matthew/Art's DNA when he was brought in if he didn't offer it up voluntarily, regardless of reason. That blood sample from the 1978 robbery could have been compared to Brennan's, though, but I think all it would have proved is that she was some blood relative. Don't know enough about the law or DNA testing to be sure.

Hmph. Going to have to rewatch that.

ok

DNA could've proved that she was his daughter instead of just some sort of relative. That's how paternity testing works, right?

Also, I think that in a few states that all people arrested have to offer a DNA sample upon processing. Although I did get that information from another TV show. Lol.

But still going back to how you explained it before ... even if they compared Brennan's DNA to the old sample, it still just proves she's related to that person and not Max. They had to link it directly somehow.

I'm so confused now. Lol.

Paternity testing doesn't work the way everyone thinks it does, or so I am told. It won't say a man is the father, but rather if he isn't. So comparing Brennan's DNA to Max's will say he could be her father, not that he is. (I have the impression maternity testing is far more accurate)

Don't ask me more--I know nothing! Nothink!

Ahh, if there's anything an analyst likes more than a technical discussion it's a technical discussion where he can spout off. both Baily and my Queen have it somewhat right, but not entirely.

When DNA tests for paternity are done they are autosomal tests (that means the DNA contains genetic information from both parents). Autosomal tests attempt to match alleles (gene sequences) from one sample to another. The testing itself is destructive (the sample is destroyed in the process) and results in the DNA strands being broken up into their 23 constituent chromosomes, each with one allele). When they actually do the paternity test they're matching alleles from the potential father to the child, looking for degree of match, commonality, and polymorphic deviation. Testing does two things, it identifies if the person being tested is related, then it determines the degree of relation.

So what does that all mean? Well it means that they could have tested Max's DNA and proven that yes, he was Brennan's father. Then if they could match that to a previous DNA sample (one they had on file, like the blood on the napkins) then yes, they'd have him cold. But there are issues with testing 30 year old DNA that's been stored at room temperature in a plastic baggie - hey, it was 1978, they didn't do DNA tests then, they tested for blood type so they were less concerned with cross contamination of samples. Who's to say how it was collected or stored? Add in the fact that some autosomal testing can have as much as a 15% error rate and it's far from a silver bullet. For example, a DNA test can prove paternity to a reasonable degree but past that you can't tell an uncle from a brother or a sister from an aunt.

They needed a warrant to get a fresh DNA sample from Max to prove he was the one who left the contribution at the crime scene. Testing Brennan would only prove that she was related to Max, but at the time Max wasn't Max, he was Arthur McGregor from Coos Bay, Oregon and they had no legal right to take DNA from him. That also brings up the whole mandatory DNA contribution thing. He wasn't arrested in any state during that episode, he was brought in for questioning by the FBI, state laws governing DNA sampling wouldn't apply (Federal, not State authority and he wasn't under arrest at the time), so no warrant, no sample and no sample, no arrest.

RM

Ah, I love the smell of fluorescing alleles in the morning...

Small issue your evilness. They could in fact do the test to prove that Max was Brennan's father. However, they would need another sample of BRENNAN'S blood to compare to the 30 year old sample. By proving that the blood of Brennan's father was that of both the current Max and the past Matthew they would have had him - except, of course, for the fact he wasn't Max at the time and thus the sample was illegal.

SO, Bailey, your original question, I believe, was why didn't they just get a blood sample from Brennan. I have no idea - technically it would have worked, but ultimately would have been thrown out. Therefore, my original answer to you was incorrect. Please accept my humble apology.

Nice to see you're back your evilness - I have had to act as a poor substitute for your evil ramblings.

joybrennan wrote:

THX1138 wrote:Ahh, if there's anything an analyst likes more than a technical discussion it's a technical discussion where he can spout off. both Baily and my Queen have it somewhat right, but not entirely.

When DNA tests for paternity are done they are autosomal tests (that means the DNA contains genetic information from both parents). Autosomal tests attempt to match alleles (gene sequences) from one sample to another. The testing itself is destructive (the sample is destroyed in the process) and results in the DNA strands being broken up into their 23 constituent chromosomes, each with one allele). When they actually do the paternity test they're matching alleles from the potential father to the child, looking for degree of match, commonality, and polymorphic deviation. Testing does two things, it identifies if the person being tested is related, then it determines the degree of relation.

So what does that all mean? Well it means that they could have tested Max's DNA and proven that yes, he was Brennan's father. Then if they could match that to a previous DNA sample (one they had on file, like the blood on the napkins) then yes, they'd have him cold. But there are issues with testing 30 year old DNA that's been stored at room temperature in a plastic baggie - hey, it was 1978, they didn't do DNA tests then, they tested for blood type so they were less concerned with cross contamination of samples. Who's to say how it was collected or stored? Add in the fact that some autosomal testing can have as much as a 15% error rate and it's far from a silver bullet. For example, a DNA test can prove paternity to a reasonable degree but past that you can't tell an uncle from a brother or a sister from an aunt.

They needed a warrant to get a fresh DNA sample from Max to prove he was the one who left the contribution at the crime scene. Testing Brennan would only prove that she was related to Max, but at the time Max wasn't Max, he was Arthur McGregor from Coos Bay, Oregon and they had no legal right to take DNA from him. That also brings up the whole mandatory DNA contribution thing. He wasn't arrested in any state during that episode, he was brought in for questioning by the FBI, state laws governing DNA sampling wouldn't apply (Federal, not State authority and he wasn't under arrest at the time), so no warrant, no sample and no sample, no arrest.

RM

Ah, I love the smell of fluorescing alleles in the morning...

Small issue your evilness. They could in fact do the test to prove that Max was Brennan's father. However, they would need another sample of BRENNAN'S blood to compare to the 30 year old sample. By proving that the blood of Brennan's father was that of both the current Max and the past Matthew they would have had him - except, of course, for the fact he wasn't Max at the time and thus the sample was illegal.

Ahh, excellent point our royal scientific advisor. The king bows to your grasp of this issue. Our knowledge is, at best, most cursory and limited to a few bio classes and a lot, and I do mean a lot, of forensics texts (since I'm sort of a junky...or a burgeoning serial killer, the jury's still out on that).

Nice to see you're back your evilness - I have had to act as a poor substitute for your evil ramblings.

Ah thou art no poor susbtitute my friend, nay, a worthy and learned peer, though mayhap not as evil as I. Still, hang around. I'll be here more and more as the season draws nigh but not so much that I won't need the aide of all my minions in the coming weeks.

RM

THX1138 wrote:

joybrennan wrote:

THX1138 wrote:Ahh, if there's anything an analyst likes more than a technical discussion it's a technical discussion where he can spout off. both Baily and my Queen have it somewhat right, but not entirely.

When DNA tests for paternity are done they are autosomal tests (that means the DNA contains genetic information from both parents). Autosomal tests attempt to match alleles (gene sequences) from one sample to another. The testing itself is destructive (the sample is destroyed in the process) and results in the DNA strands being broken up into their 23 constituent chromosomes, each with one allele). When they actually do the paternity test they're matching alleles from the potential father to the child, looking for degree of match, commonality, and polymorphic deviation. Testing does two things, it identifies if the person being tested is related, then it determines the degree of relation.

So what does that all mean? Well it means that they could have tested Max's DNA and proven that yes, he was Brennan's father. Then if they could match that to a previous DNA sample (one they had on file, like the blood on the napkins) then yes, they'd have him cold. But there are issues with testing 30 year old DNA that's been stored at room temperature in a plastic baggie - hey, it was 1978, they didn't do DNA tests then, they tested for blood type so they were less concerned with cross contamination of samples. Who's to say how it was collected or stored? Add in the fact that some autosomal testing can have as much as a 15% error rate and it's far from a silver bullet. For example, a DNA test can prove paternity to a reasonable degree but past that you can't tell an uncle from a brother or a sister from an aunt.

They needed a warrant to get a fresh DNA sample from Max to prove he was the one who left the contribution at the crime scene. Testing Brennan would only prove that she was related to Max, but at the time Max wasn't Max, he was Arthur McGregor from Coos Bay, Oregon and they had no legal right to take DNA from him. That also brings up the whole mandatory DNA contribution thing. He wasn't arrested in any state during that episode, he was brought in for questioning by the FBI, state laws governing DNA sampling wouldn't apply (Federal, not State authority and he wasn't under arrest at the time), so no warrant, no sample and no sample, no arrest.

RM

Ah, I love the smell of fluorescing alleles in the morning...

Small issue your evilness. They could in fact do the test to prove that Max was Brennan's father. However, they would need another sample of BRENNAN'S blood to compare to the 30 year old sample. By proving that the blood of Brennan's father was that of both the current Max and the past Matthew they would have had him - except, of course, for the fact he wasn't Max at the time and thus the sample was illegal.

Ahh, excellent point our royal scientific advisor. The king bows to your grasp of this issue. Our knowledge is, at best, most cursory and limited to a few bio classes and a lot, and I do mean a lot, of forensics texts (since I'm sort of a junky...or a burgeoning serial killer, the jury's still out on that).

Nice to see you're back your evilness - I have had to act as a poor substitute for your evil ramblings.

Ah thou art no poor susbtitute my friend, nay, a worthy and learned peer, though mayhap not as evil as I. Still, hang around. I'll be here more and more as the season draws nigh but not so much that I won't need the aide of all my minions in the coming weeks.

RM

I will do my utmost best, my liege. Though my time may be limited by my preparing for the evilness exam (LSAT) 'tis no difficulty, for the reek of evilness wafts well ahead of the season. To hightlight the depth of destruction may be the only Bones game in the village.

I love the sneakers Booth wears in the episode they are showing tonight on TNT...Superhero in the Alley....they stick out like a sore thumb with his suit but I think it's so cute...

It just doesn't make any sense to me that Brennan would say that Angela isn't exactly intelligent but she is talented. I know she was probably referring to the fact that Angela is an Artist, and she considers art to be more of a talent than an intelligence, but what about the computer programs that Angela created. My boyfriend who I have made watch with me is a computer science minor who actually knows enough about this stuff to create his own video game (yes I am dating a squint and I am a squint ) and he informs me that it is probably unrealistic for one person to create everything that she created in season 1, especially over the period of one year that according to the 100th is the period of time Angela had to work with Brennan before the season year. She would most likely need a highly trained team to help her. If we are to really believe Angela did all this, she would definitely have to be a genius. Maybe the writers just didn't look into the actual amount of work that goes into creating computer programs.

Cordelia wrote:It just doesn't make any sense to me that Brennan would say that Angela isn't exactly intelligent but she is talented. I know she was probably referring to the fact that Angela is an Artist, and she considers art to be more of a talent than an intelligence, but what about the computer programs that Angela created. My boyfriend who I have made watch with me is a computer science minor who actually knows enough about this stuff to create his own video game (yes I am dating a squint and I am a squint ) and he informs me that [b] it is probably unrealistic for one person to create everything that she created in season 1, especially over the period of one year that according to the 100th is the period of time Angela had to work with Brennan before the season year. She would most likely need a highly trained team to help her. If we are to really believe Angela did all this, she would definitely have to be a genius. Maybe the writers just didn't look into the actual amount of work that goes into creating computer programs.[b]

Yep. Not to mention, she understands stuff that her husband talks about in the lab. Of course, Brennan was identifying remains at Wacko at 17 - AND judging by the reunion, was the in high school at the normal age of most high school students - even though her IQ is supposed to be off the charts. Yeah, I'd say they didn't think some things through.