Anyone else for the myth of junk DNA? Richard Dawkins, for one
|July 13, 2011||Posted by News under Darwinism, 'Junk DNA'|
He certainly drew the desired Darwinian conclusion:
“The amount of DNA in organisms,” Dawkins wrote in 1976, “is more than is strictly necessary for building them: A large fraction of the DNA is never translated into protein. From the point of view of the individual organism this seems paradoxical. If the ‘purpose’ of DNA is to supervise the building of bodies, it is surprising to find a large quantity of DNA which does no such thing. Biologists are racking their brains trying to think what useful task this apparently surplus DNA is doing. But from the point of view of the selfish genes themselves, there is no paradox. The true ‘purpose’ of DNA is to survive, no more and no less. The simplest way to explain the surplus DNA is to suppose that it is a parasite, or at best a harmless but useless passenger, hitching a ride in the survival machines created by the other DNA. “
– Jonathan Wells, author of The Myth of Junk DNA, p. 20
And he was wrong as a result. Just like these folk:
Follow UD News at Twitter!