Posted on 01/13/2009 6:40:50 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Are you saying that UTRs are not part of the DNA?
No. I am saying that untranslated region of DNA, if they have any known function at all, that function is tied to protein production. Transcription of other genes is protein production GGG. What do you think a transcript of a gene DOES GGG, other than code for a protein and regulate its production?
CAN YOU NAME A FUNCTION OF DNA NOT ASSOCIATED WITH PROTEIN PRODUCTION?
No you cannot.
EPIC FAIL.
Protein coding and regulation are two different functions, Allmendream. I am hard-pressed to understand why you can’t grasp that.
Regulatory sequences can do NOTHING without the underlying protein code. They have no function apart from the production and regulation of the protein coding function.
After flailing around in numerous posts are you now willing to admit that there IS NO FUNCTION for DNA other than protein production, or are you going to pretend that 5’ UTR’s regulation of gene transcription is not involved in protein production?
Can you admit that GGG? It sure makes you look silly after numerous posts trying to claim there was a function apart from protein production.
Too bad so much of the article is false.
But at least the author cited the Creation Journal so no one will say that his article hasn’t been “peer-reviewed.”
==But how can regulatory functions be said to be “”far more functional than the protein code” when its ONLY function is regulation of the protein code?
What requires more information, the information to produce protein, or the meta-information that controls which transcripts are required, which transcripts need to be translated, how much of each needs to be produced, when it needs to be produced, etc, etc? Could it be that is why UTRs (formerly predicted to be junk by the neo-Darwinists) are 50 times as functionally active than the genic regions that are used to make protein?
And BTW, given the near 100% functionality of UTRs, are you willing to admit that the neo-Darwinian “junk” DNA prediction has been completely falsified by science, and can no longer be used to establish either phylogenetic trees or phylogenetic divergence dates?
glad you caught on...rd.
How is “information” measured GGG?
Are you now willing to admit that DNA has no discernible function outside of protein production or are you going to continue displaying your ignorance?
No credible Biologists ever said the untranslated regions of mRNA was junk. That is another strawman based entirely upon your own ignorance.
Do you think the untranslated regions of mRNA (UTR’s) have a function outside of protein production GGG?
When asked to give an example of DNA function outside of protein production you stated that ‘they find new functions all the time’.
Perhaps you could detail even ONE of these functions found for DNA that have nothing to do with protein production.
CAN YOU TELL ME A FUNCTION FOR DNA OUTSIDE OF PROTEIN PRODUCTION?
NO, YOU CANNOT.
EPIC FAIL GGG.
==Are you now willing to admit that DNA has no discernible function outside of protein production
Actually, UTRs are also involved in stopping protein production. Does stopping protein production also count as protein production in your book. Indeed, if we were talking about a book, you would probaly say the only thing that book publishers produce is paper.
==Do you think the untranslated regions of mRNA (UTR’s) have a function outside of protein production GGG?
By your logic brick buildings are ONLY the result of brick production. Your neo-Darwinist reductionism is a real science stopper.
So far all your ‘new functions’ for DNA all seem to be wrapped up in the ONLY known function of DNA; protein production.
How embarrassing for you!
Sorry, Allmendream. Stopping protein production is not protein production.
The “new” functions for DNA they find, outside of protein production, is negative regulation of protein production?
That is hardly “new”, and it is most certainly not a function apart from protein production; it is REGULATION of protein production.
So are you willing to admit that DNA has no known function other than protein production, and the regulation of protein production?
Or will you continue in your EPIC FAIL?
As per usual, when I take the time to look into the matter, I start finding more and more exceptions to your reductionist thinking. As it turns out, Riboswitches, which come from UTRs, not only start and stop protein production, but they also regulate themselves. YOU ARE ONCE AGAIN WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Survey says XXX.
Stay tuned. I’m sure I will find even more exceptions to your reductionist blanket.
And what do UTR’s regulation of themselves do? What function, apart from protein production, or regulation of protein production, do they perform?
I have repeatedly challenged you to name a single function for DNA outside of protein production (and no, regulation of protein production is not a function outside of protein production; Biological protein production is by definition a REGULATED process).
You have repeatedly doubled down and claimed that “new” functions for DNA are found often.
Yet when challenged you fall flat on your face.
How embarrassing for you.
“I’m just curious about what you’re supposing here - that putting God back into school will improve our kids’ math and science skills? Please elaborate.”
History bears it out. Test scores from private Christian schools and homeschools bear it out.
SAT/ACT homeschoolers:
http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200105070.asp
Standardized test scores homeschoolers:
http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp
Why don’t those studies ever compare results from Honors/AP/GT students from public schools?
Interesting statistics to be sure. (Not the least of which, that females score significantly lower than males on the Math portion.)
Anyway, I went to public school and I blew those numbers out of the water!
A) Private christian schools and homeschoolers, I’m guessing, are comprised of above average family incomes and dual parent households over “all public schools,” and B) Homeschoolers “teach to the test” more than anyone.
But none of this is the point. I ask again... you are saying that “God in the classroom = higher math and science scores?”
You and I have a major disconnect.
My “side” merely wants an educated populace.
More like a programmed, socialized populace.
The evidence indicates by all accounts the NEA is a total failure, and a large reason they are is because they demand to sterlize God from education, and as opposed to teaching they socialize PC godless liberal indoctrination.
My “side” merely wants an educated populace.
More like a programmed, socialized populace.
The evidence indicates by all accounts the NEA is a total failure, and a large reason they are is because they demand to sterlize God from education, and as opposed to teaching they socialize PC godless liberal indoctrination.
It’s cute when you put words in my mouth.
I’ll ask you - even though we’re woefully off topic - what is your solution? What would my son’s day look like at tpanther Elementary School?
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.