Intricate Toiling Found In Nooks of DNA Once Believed to Stand Idle

Washington Post ^ | 6/14/07 | Rick Weiss

[Tribune7]

the designer made serious errors, wasting millions of bases of DNA on a blueprint full of junk and scribbles. Evolution, in contrast, can easily explain them as nothing more than failed experiments in a random process…
Ken Miller, 1994
Life’s Grand Design

And note that Michael Behe -- using ID -- predicted 10 years ago that "junk DNA" would be found not to be junk.

[TChris]

Sorry. Did a search using “DNA” and thought the coast was clear. :)

No worries! I don't consider it a duplicate, since they're different articles on the same subject. I just thought the other one might be of interest as well.

[csense]

The expectation was...

So many predic...er, expectations, so little space on the cutting room floor...

...that many of the most active DNA sequences in humans would be prevalent in other mammals, too, because evolution tends to save and reuse what works best. But more than half were not found in other creatures, which suggests they may not be that important in people, either, said Ewan Birney of the European Bioinformatics Institute in Cambridge, England, a coordinator of the Encode effort.

"I think of them as gate-crashers at a party," Birney said. "They appeared by chance over evolutionary time . . . neither to the organism's benefit nor to its hindrance. That is quite an interesting shift in perspective for many biologists."

"Gate-crahsers at a party"

And this is supposed to be serious, objective science.
Excuse me while I laugh.