[Virginia-American]

For example, ID researchers made the prediction that all genetic material in a chromosome set (the genome)is designed for a purpose. This inclused the so-called "junk-DNA". This appears to have been demonstrated within the last two to three years.

There's a thread on this very topic: see Post 19

These guys removed mega base pairs from mouse DNA, the mice bred and had fertile offspring, and the researchers couldn't find *anything* wrong with them.

Doesn't *prove* that the missing DNA didn't have *some* use, but does cast a bit of doubt on the ID-inspired speculation.

I said "ID-inspired speculation" instead of "prediction of ID theory" because there is no agreement about the hypothetical designer's abilities or motives.

For example, some say it is God, but Behe swore that it could have died millions of years ago, as far as he could tell.

The speculation that there is no junk DNA is premised on a particular version of the hypothetical designer. What are these assumptions about it? Why shouldn't there be junk?

[AntiGuv]

mega placemarker

[jennyp]

The speculation that there is no junk DNA is premised on a particular version of the hypothetical designer. What are these assumptions about it? Why shouldn't there be junk?

Because God don't make junk. I know this is true because I saw it on a bumpersticker once. :-)

[SampleMan]

I'd never heard the argument that there is no junk DNA. Thanks for the post.