[metmom]

Of course, an intelligent design paradigm would have predicted function for “junk” DNA or “junk” RNA all along, perhaps leading scientists to “investigate them further” much sooner.

I've never seen people in such denial about things simply because they don't like the reasons others have.

It was the evos who claimed that there was *junk DNA*. Creationists denied that it was junk and predicted that it would prove to be useful after all because God wouldn't create something useless.

So, evos didn't like the reasoning and deride and ridicule creationists for that and we now know who was right.

I don't see any *scientific* justification for labeling something *junk* just because scientists don't see any immediate use for it. And then they complain about creationists not having a sound basis for their rationale.

Go figure....

[GodGunsGuts]

I just happened to be browsing through the following when I read your reply:

http://biologicinstitute.org/2009/10/06/the-science-of-denial/#more-48

[the anti-liberal]

^God wouldn't create something useless.^

Explain Joe Biden then!

[Liberty1970]

Creationists denied that it was junk and predicted that it would prove to be useful after all because God wouldn't create something useless.

I suspect, as a creationist, that there is some amount of degraded DNA out there since the Fall. God would not create something useless, but the Creation is not in its perfect, created state.

I suspect that 'junk DNA' will turn out to be much like 'vestigial organs' - massively overstated by evolutionists because of their paradigm, yet with a small remnant of truth. For just as the blind eyes of cave fish and withered wings of flightless island cormorants, etc., seem to be irrefutable examples of vestigial structures, so some DNA does seem clearly degraded and non-functional.

But all of this points back to a time when those structures and DNA did have a function. This is de-evolution, not evolution, and so it is rather ridiculous of evolutionists to bring it up. It is evidence for a degenerating world, not evidence of the opposite such as they need. (For creationists believe in a dynamic world dying since the Fall, not stasis as evolutionists caricature.)