Goes to show the hoops that the evos jump through to make their fanciful story come true.
Either a piece of DNA is total junk, or it's useful. Period. It's that simple. If a section of DNA is found to have a transcribing region, no matter how small, than it's not "junk" - it's evidence for a Designer.
I've heard desperate evos, realizing their heyday is over, claim that these are only "small coding regions amidst the junk", like an "occasional oasis in a desert". They use some sorry excuse like "exaptation of junk code", as if bits of information could somehow be added to the once-useless code, just like in "flipping a switch". (Well, what flips the switch, and keeps it flipped, assuming that's the mechanism? Evolution has no such mechanism to do that.)
What a joke. Again, the overeducated evoloser scientists are outdone by their creationist counterparts, despite their disparate gubmint funding. The evo science wannabees need to start leaving the real research to the true pros: the Creation Scientists.
when my molecular biologist friend and I first heard the concept of “junk DNA” back in the 80s, we just looked at each other and knew it was false. He noted that over time, functions would be found for what was first called Junk DNA.
Besides noting you can’t analyze what you can’t measure, there is the fact that the technologies associated with studying transcription have only improved. So this evolution of understanding is only inevitable.
I offer that it is our concept of “function” which will have to change as we fill in more pieces of the dynamics of DNA and other nucleic acids. Even odd-ball stuff like understanding the electrical properties (already in process) and mechanical properties (a double helix is a spring with a certain amount of tension in it - It has been measured)of DNA will have a dramatic impact on how we understand biological “function”.
I like this problem in logic, too...
From the article:
“If you don’t have this junk in your genome then you can’t evolve and are stuck, thereby remaining in what is termed evolutionary stasis,” Dr Greene said.
That being the case, the first simple cell would have been ‘stuck’ and could not have evolved into anything else - micro or macro. By definition, the first life would not have had any ‘left over’ junk-DNA.