Category: ‘Junk DNA’

Jonathan Wells on the junk DNA myth

A bit of background to the Cornell OBI paper. more

Open Mike: Cornell OBI Conference Chapter 11—Not Junk After All—Conclusion

Jonathan Wells: So non-protein-coding regions of DNA that some previously regarded as “junk”turn out to encode biological information that greatly increases the known information-carrying capacity of DNA. more

Open Mike: Cornell OBI Conference Chapter 11—Not Junk After All —Abstract

Jonathan Wells: Clearly, the notion of “junk DNA” is obsolete, and the amount of biological information in the genome far exceeds the information in protein-coding regions. more

Jumping gene proves beneficial for organism

Jumping genes are not so much “poorly understood” as”Darwinianly understood.” But we mustn’t repeat ourselves. more

Somebody finally admits the real reason Darwin’s followers NEED junk DNA

The very tantrum that Mattick and Dinger are addressing is evidence that Darwin’s followers do NOT think that “little junk DNA” is compatible with any theory they would accept. more

Junk DNA: Just because information is never used, doesn’t mean it is junk

What if junk DNA is in fact a list of possibilities? That is, a life form can possibly do or be what is in it but not what isn’t in it. more

And now … Lazarus DNA?

Actually if a theory can’t be wrong, it also can’t be right. It can, however, be irrelevant. more

Nothing makes sense in evolution except in the light of junk DNA?

Actually, most Darwinists will just announce that the fact that there is very little junk DNA is completely consistent with their theory, just as a lot of junk DNA would have been completely consistent with it. more


After my recent exchanges with Larry Moran, I read some of the comments on his blog posts. I wont be doing that again. It was generally just depressing; hatred (I really don’t understand why they waste their lives responding to us if they have such a low opinion) – not much edifying or thoughtful. In […] more

Theology According to P.Z. Myers

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.

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

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

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

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

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”

“… insisting that the vast ocean around them is nothing to worry about.” more

Todd C.Wood: ENCODE data tempts some to anticreationist conspiracy?

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 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

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’” …

… they taught their fans to believe it too. more

« Previous PageNext Page »