Category: ‘Junk DNA’
Theology According to P.Z. Myers
| May 9, 2013 | Posted by DonaldM under 'Junk DNA', Biology, Convergent evolution, Darwinism, Evolution, Evolutionary biology, Genetics, Intelligent Design, Philosophy, Science |
Over on The Panda’s Thumb blog, Darwinian apologist P.Z. Myers recently posted a pejorative laden critique of a review article by Casey Luskin. Luskin was responding to a recent New York Times article on a study purporting to show how certain genes in fish might hold an important clue on how fins turned to feet.… more
Failure to Educate? Failure to Persuade.
| May 9, 2013 | Posted by andyjones under 'Junk DNA', Intelligent Design |
Larry Moran replied to my latest post with an admission of failure. He thinks he has failed to educate, but I think rather he is confusing the word ‘persuade’ with the word ‘educate’. He thinks I am rationalising junk DNA with a pile of ‘what-ifs’. But the fact is that most of my ‘what-ifs’ are… more
Getting me an Education
| April 23, 2013 | Posted by andyjones under 'Junk DNA', Darwinism, Evolutionary biology, Intelligent Design, science education, The Design of Life |
Larry Moran has decided to educate me about junk DNA. I appreciate the level of detail he has provided. I am not an expert in this field. I do however have a brain and, as a physicist, a vastly superior brain (I joke, sort of). I am not an IDiot, nor am I a larey… more
(More and more) Function, the evolution-free gospel of ENCODE
| April 4, 2013 | Posted by andyjones under 'Junk DNA', Darwinism, Intelligent Design |
Larry’s ‘reply’ (to my first post) appears to have replicated and evolved into a real reply (to my second post) with some real information. Well, a little information. When I say information, I don’t just mean grammatically correct and unambiguous English text, I mean things that offered ‘surprisal’ and improved my ability to understand the… more
(More) Function, the evolution-free gospel of ENCODE
| March 24, 2013 | Posted by andyjones under 'Junk DNA', Intelligent Design, Origin Of Life, Self-Org. Theory |
I need a picture of a small, hot-blooded mammal taunting an irritable dinosaur. An animation would be even better: the dinosaur would have a tic which makes him roar ‘IDiot’ constantly. Maybe make that several small mammals, becoming dozens and then hundreds. Singing something witty to the hamster dance. Or maybe not that last bit.… more
Function, the evolution-free gospel of ENCODE
| February 22, 2013 | Posted by andyjones under 'Junk DNA', Darwinism, Genomics |
There is no better title for this post than the very title some Darwinists chose for themselves: On the immortality of television sets: “function” in the human genome according to the evolution-free gospel of ENCODE Darwinists are still struggling to come to terms with the idea, from the ENCODE project, that 80% of the genome… more
Junk DNA: “The Darwinist bloggers are defending a ragged flag on a rapidly shrinking ice floe”
| October 2, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', News |
“… insisting that the vast ocean around them is nothing to worry about.” more
Todd C.Wood: ENCODE data tempts some to anticreationist conspiracy?
| October 2, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', News |
Darwin’s men were misled by their own beliefs into adopting the highly improbable idea that most of the genome is junk and now they can just stew in it. more
Design Inference vs. Design Hypothesis
| October 1, 2012 | Posted by William Dembski under 'Junk DNA', Design inference, ID Foundations, Intelligent Design |
Evolutionnews.org just published an article by me titled “Design Inference vs. Design Hypothesis.” Here is an excerpt: The logic of the design inference moves from a marker of intelligence (specified complexity) to an intelligence as causal agent responsible for that marker. The direction of this logic can, however, be reversed. Thus, instead, one can postulate… more
Latest ENCODE Research Validates ID Predictions On Non-Coding Repertoire
| September 6, 2012 | Posted by Jonathan M under 'Junk DNA' |
Readers will likely recall the ENCODE project, published in a series of papers in 2007, in which (among other interesting findings) it was discovered that, even though the vast majority of our DNA does not code for proteins, the human genome is nonetheless pervasively transcribed into mRNA. The science media and blogosphere is now abuzz… more
Not only did Darwin’s followers believe in a “vast amount of functionless so-called ‘junk DNA’” …
| August 21, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', News |
… they taught their fans to believe it too. more
Ken “we suck” Miller wrong again — peer reviewed article obliterates Miller’s claims
| August 8, 2012 | Posted by scordova under 'Junk DNA', Humor, Intelligent Design |
Lamenting the fact Darwinist have a hard time persuading the public, Darwinist Ken Miller once said of himself and his colleagues”WE SUCK“. Curiously, Jerry Coyne said the same thing, “WE SUCK“. Egg surely is now on Ken Miller’s face in light of new scientific developments. But first, what did Miller claim: “Intelligent design cannot explain… more
Sometimes, one runs into ID opponents who are just so confused ….
| July 30, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', News |
… that it is hard to know what to say in response. more
Mouse junk DNA: “vast amounts of information vital to gene function”
| July 6, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', News |
Interesting denouement for junk DNA as a supposed slam dunk for Darwinism. more
Arthur Hunt and Steve Matheson vs. the UD Community
| June 11, 2012 | Posted by scordova under 'Junk DNA', Darwinism, Intelligent Design |
Art Hunt, from the archives of Uncommon Descent June 14, 2010: As far as the functional vs. non-functional business, there is one key fact that IDists ignore in all of this. I refer, of course, to the fact that intronic RNA is made and then thrown away. We don’t call it “junk” because we don’t… more
Even IF the Genome is Full of “Junk”
| May 28, 2012 | Posted by GilDodgen under 'Junk DNA', Intelligent Design, theistic evolution |
I particularly enjoyed Denyse’s comment here about how, according to some evolutionary theorists — who should be more accurately depicted as evolutionary storytellers — Darwinian evolution programmed us to find Darwinian evolution difficult to believe. This is called science? A much more reasonable explanation is that our minds were programmed to invent computer programs, and… more
You knew this had to happen: Junkomics
| March 22, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', News |
“Junkomics is the study of artificially induced expression of junk DNA sequences,” making functional elements from junk DNA. more
Three dimensional chromosome arrangements can affect genetics
| March 2, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', Genetics, News |
The Darwinist needs to get out more. more
Transposable elements are the new “junk DNA”? May have function ….
| February 8, 2012 | Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', Genetics, News |
“It seems, then, that there is positive selection for transposable elements at these sites, suggesting that insertion has a beneficial effect on the host.” more
Are Selfish Genes Selfish? Are Retro-transposons Junk?
| January 12, 2012 | Posted by PaV under 'Junk DNA', Darwinism |
At PhysOrg.com, they have an article dealing with the CTCF protein and its binding sites. It turns out that the CTCF has both binding sites that are common to all mammalian lineages, and thus “conserved” and “ancient”, as well as binding sites found only in particular lineages. The binding sites found only in particular lineages… more