"Please, lets keep the "professional" jargon to a minimum. I have a science background and you just shot over my head."
That's too bad. You'll have to keep up or move on.
"What protein does this "gene" code for, and what purpose does it serve? "
Do I have to do all your work for you? I mean, really! Is it not enough that I provided the name of the gene, now I have to come up with a protein and function?
"I don't hold to traditional science orthodoxy (TOE). However, I don't see how this would "prove" ID."
This gene didn't *poof* out of thin air. It had to have been designed.
"This gene didn't *poof* out of thin air. It had to have been designed."
Too simplistic an answer for those that hold to TOE. Although I'm not one of them - my being a YEC. However, trying to be unbiased, I still don't see the existence of a gene as proof of ID. Or, at least proof that a traditional science TOE adherrant would even consider.