Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jumping 'Junk' DNA May Fuel Mammalian Evolution ('Junk' DNA not junk at all...ID Vindicated Again)
Scientific American ^ | April 23, 2007 | JR Minkel

Posted on 06/21/2007 5:55:18 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

1 posted on 06/21/2007 5:55:21 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Dembski on ID Vindication:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/creationism/zuck-is-out-of-luck-marsupial-findings-vindicate-behe-denton-hoyle/#more-2438

AiG Creationists nailed this a long time ago:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i2/junk_dna.asp


2 posted on 06/21/2007 5:56:59 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger; SirLinksalot; balch3

ping


3 posted on 06/21/2007 5:57:56 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I don’t follow this stuff closely, but I must say, the concept of “junk” DNA, just because we couldn’t immediately figure out its function, seriously flunked the smell test.


4 posted on 06/21/2007 6:07:37 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Funny how AiG and Dembski aren’t the ones who researched this, it was them durn evilutionists who figured this out!
5 posted on 06/21/2007 6:07:43 PM PDT by RFC_Gal (It's not just a boulder; It's a rock! A ro-o-ock. The pioneers used to ride these babies for miles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I avoid the evo/religion threads like the plague, but I have no problem critcising incompetent, arrogant and full of themselves wannabe scientists.

From the getgo, I had problems with so-called scientists researching DNA biology and announcing that there were so many "useless" segments of DNA:

Translation - if I can't understand it, it must serve no positive dunction.

What sort of science is that?
Even the popular name, 'junk DNA' gives the game away.

6 posted on 06/21/2007 6:10:12 PM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard; All

Didn’t pass the smell test indeed!

More from National Geographic:

First Decoded Marsupial Genome Reveals “Junk DNA” Surprise (but not for ID/Creation scientists!):

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070510-opossum-dna.html


7 posted on 06/21/2007 6:10:49 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RFC_Gal

==Funny how AiG and Dembski aren’t the ones who researched this, it was them durn evilutionists who figured this out!

Wrong...see links in post #2


8 posted on 06/21/2007 6:11:36 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

The Darwiniacs have been fooled over and over by their own paradigm. This is just the latest episode where they got egg all over their face. See links in post #2 to see how IDers/Creation scientists predicted this turn of events—GGG


9 posted on 06/21/2007 6:14:28 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“Putting thousands of animals aboard the Ark could have had a dual purpose. Not only did it preserve their lives, but also it would probably allow transfer of genetic material and/or activation of latent genes simultaneously in all land animals. Under the relatively crowded Ark conditions, transfer of genetic material from one species to another through broad host range viruses, parasitic mites or fleas would be facilitated. This might have produced a distribution of AGEs in species in such a way as to defy evolutionary phylogeny, as is seen for the Tc1/mariner family and in the gypsy family of retrotransposons.”

That isn’t science...


10 posted on 06/21/2007 6:14:29 PM PDT by RFC_Gal (It's not just a boulder; It's a rock! A ro-o-ock. The pioneers used to ride these babies for miles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RFC_Gal

It’s called speculation. They nevertheless predicted that Junk DNA would turn out to be functional DNA, as did the IDers.

re: “Junk” DNA

IDers/Creationists 1

Church of Darwin 0


11 posted on 06/21/2007 6:17:13 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
This is just the latest episode where they got egg all over their face.

My main point is that it is sorry science to even contemplate a concept such as 'junk DNA'.

On the eternal shouting match level, my attitude is a pox on both their houses!

12 posted on 06/21/2007 6:19:25 PM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
I don’t follow this stuff closely, but I must say, the concept of “junk” DNA, just because we couldn’t immediately figure out its function, seriously flunked the smell test.

And if it flunks a buzzard's smell test...

13 posted on 06/21/2007 6:21:21 PM PDT by null and void (Tired of living in the shadows? Move to Sunny Mexico!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

==My main point is that it is sorry science to even contemplate a concept such as ‘junk DNA’.

Actually, it makes perfect sense from the Darwinian perspective. The problem is, science has once again proved them wrong.


14 posted on 06/21/2007 6:26:28 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Did it (smell bad enough to) knock him off the wagon?


15 posted on 06/21/2007 6:26:30 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

They also believe the Earth is 6,000 - 10,000 years old...


16 posted on 06/21/2007 6:47:30 PM PDT by RFC_Gal (It's not just a boulder; It's a rock! A ro-o-ock. The pioneers used to ride these babies for miles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

Ask him...


17 posted on 06/21/2007 6:50:22 PM PDT by null and void (Tired of living in the shadows? Move to Sunny Mexico!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RFC_Gal

No, it’s not science. It’s total rubbish.


18 posted on 06/21/2007 6:53:06 PM PDT by popdonnelly (Our first responsibility is to keep the power of the Presidency out of the hands of the Clintons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RFC_Gal

Anyone who thinks genetic material is transmitted by fleas should consider the dog.


19 posted on 06/21/2007 6:56:46 PM PDT by popdonnelly (Our first responsibility is to keep the power of the Presidency out of the hands of the Clintons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
Was the term junk DNA what the scientists involved called it or was it the popular media which used the term in an attempt to explain a complex subject?
20 posted on 06/21/2007 6:58:12 PM PDT by RFC_Gal (It's not just a boulder; It's a rock! A ro-o-ock. The pioneers used to ride these babies for miles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson