[tacticalogic]

In this same time frame, did any non-creationist/ID scientists argue that the DNA in question might actually be functional?

[GodGunsGuts]

I’m not aware of any. Every Evo website and journal I am aware of was assuming that the non-coding regions were leftover “junk” from our evolutionary past. Creationists, on the other hand, were arguing that God would not have designed a genome that required so much wasted energy to maintain, replicate, etc.

[GodGunsGuts]

==In this same time frame, did any non-creationist/ID scientists argue that the DNA in question might actually be functional?

Was able to locate one Evo geneticist who by 2003 realized the following:

‘A leading figure in world genetics, Prof. John Mattick, recently claimed that, “the failure to recognise the implications of the non-coding DNA will go down as the biggest mistake in the history of molecular biology”.’

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s898887.htm

[Diamond]

Yes, some did.

Here's a list of quotations collected by an evolutionary biologist:

Junk DNA -- the quotes of interest series.

Cordially,