You agreed with Graur's attack on ENCODE.
You also claimed that ENCODE agrees that 80% or 95% of DNA is somehow "constrained" or "restrained" or "influenced" by evolution
And this, you claimed, proves there's no evolution.
The fact is you've posted nothing from ENCODE suggesting more than ~10% of DNA is "constrained" by evolution.
>>Danny Denier: “ Either you are lying, or you don’t understand what you read. I have never trashed ENCODE. “
>>Delusional Joey said: “You agreed with Graur’s attack on ENCODE.”
That is two posts in a row in which you made that same false claim, Delusional Joey.
Joey reminds me of those Seminar Callers that began to frequent Rush’s radio show in the 1990’s. Their entire life centers around being a nuisance.
*****************
>>Delusional Joey said: “You also claimed that ENCODE agrees that 80% or 95% of DNA is somehow “constrained” or “restrained” or “influenced” by evolution”
Wrong, again. In their 2012 report, ENCODE claimed that 80% of the DNA is constrained, which means it is not selectable, and cannot evolve. A later 2018 paper by a Swiss team pushed that number up to 95%.
*****************
>>Delusional Joey said: “And this, you claimed, proves there’s no evolution.”
You misquoted me, Joey. This is where I got the information that the myth of human evolution has been exposed:
“According to the popular neutral model of evolutionary theory, much of the human genome is nothing but randomly evolving junk. All of this so-called neutral DNA that is allegedly not under any’selective restraint’ only serves as fodder for functional new genes and traits to somehow magically arise and thus provide the engine of evolution... Global data among diverse people groups for DNA sequence variability across the human genome was inputted into a statistical model of neutral evolution. It was discovered that, at most, only 5% of the human genome could randomly evolve and not be subject to the alleged forces of selection. Fanny Pouyet, the lead author of the published study stated, ‘What we find is that less than 5% of the human genome can actually be considered as ‘neutral.’’ Oops, so much for human evolution!... This study is just one more example in a long line of failures where the theoretical models of evolution have completely collapsed in light of real-world data. And in this case, the failure was even more spectacular because the statistical model that was used was based on theoretical evolutionary assumptions.” [Tomkins, Jeffrey P., “95% of Human Genome Can’t Evolve.” Institute for Creation Research, 2018]
The last sentence is most revealing.
*****************
>>Delusional Joey said: “The fact is you’ve posted nothing from ENCODE suggesting more than ~10% of DNA is “constrained” by evolution.
No, Joey. ENCODE claimed in their 2012 report that 80% was contrained. The Swiss team, quoted above by Dr. Tomkins, claimed in 2018 that over 95% was constrained, which means less than 5% can evolve.
Mr. Kalamata