Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Antonio Texas
Total Points: 32,894,773,793,396.80
Originally Posted by Hous
Yup, they could pass on the recessive blue eyed gene for generations. Only one side of baby mommas parents must carry the blue eyed gene since she does not have blue eyes. If she had blue eyes, both parents would have to carry it. Only one parent must carry it, of course both could (and odds of passing it on increase if both carry it). Same logic goes as far as baby mommas grandparents, only one needs to carry the blue eyed gene.
So if only one of her grandparents carried the recessive Gg gene, and the other three were GG; that one g gene must have been passed to one of her parents. Then when her parents met, the one that carried Gg, must have give the "g" gene to her. Then when she met you, your "g" combines with her "g."
If baby mommas mother is GG and father is Gg or gG, then baby momma will have a 50% of carrying recessive Gg eye color gene, 50% chance of carrying GG gene. Since we know baby has blue eyes, then we can conclusively infer baby momma is not GG.
Only one parent must have "g" if the child carries it. Both must have it if the child displays blue eyes. Does that make sense?
That science stuff reminded me of HS. I understand what you're staying fully. I just thought it was funny because no one of her greats or mine has it. You good people, Hous. You remember that other site? Good God!!!!