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!
==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.
Why? One can contemplate whatever one likes as long as one goes out and tests it. Initially after we had just discovered genes people understood the ones that coded for protein, but didn’t understand the point of all the rest of the DNA. So scientists went out to look for function, and we’ve found it as expected (some regulatory, some structural, some over time making new genes). However, the majority of noncoding (protein and organized regulatory RNA transcripts) DNA still has no known function.
Sometimes it takes a little shouting, among other things, to settle an argument. It's called progress. Embrace it or be eaten alive.