Danny Denier post #410:
"Joey I have been responding to one silly post of yours after another, all afternoon.
You must be desperate to keep your friends from finding out you are a fraud." Nah, I'm just trying to keep up with your nonsense.
Danny Denier quoting BJK post #328: "I'm just using your own quotes, did you already forget what you posted?
None of your quotes from ENCODE claimed 80% of DNA is "constrained" or "restrained" or even "influenced" by evolution.
ENCODE's numbers were 5% to 10% "constrained" by evolution.
Your 95% number comes from a Swiss study, not ENCODE, and even the Swiss nowhere claimed 95% is "constrained" by evolution.
Those are your posts, not mine."
Danny Denier "Those statements have no basis in reality, Joey.
Perhaps you were tired."
That covers Denier Rules #1, #5 & #9.
In fact, my statements you quoted are 100% accurate, at least so far as I've seen.
I'm still hoping you'll somehow produce quotes which prove me wrong.
But hope is fading fast.
Danny Denier: "Forget Graur: he is your useless source. "
No, Danny denier boy, Graur is your source, I never heard of him.
You introduced him here saying you agree (or disagree?) with his trashing of ENCODE.
Danny Denier quoting Science 2012: "A decade-long project, the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE), has found that 80% of the human genome serves some purpose, biochemically speaking."
Sure, I "got that" the first time -- 80% has some function, but what percent is "constrained" by evolution?
Danny Denier quoting Nature 2012: "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project has systematically mapped regions of transcription, transcription factor association, chromatin structure and histone modification.
These data enabled us to assign biochemical functions for 80% of the genome..."
Right, "got it" again -- 80% has some sort of function.
But what percent is "constrained" by evolution?
Danny Denier quoting I.C.R. 2013: "Biochemical functions have been determined for at least 80% of the human genome and most of the rest is also predicted to be functional (Dunham, et al., 2012) to at least some degree."
Right, still "got it", 80% functional but what percent is "constrained" by evolution?
Danny Denier "As you can see, Science, Nature and ICR all reported that ENCODE claimed 80% of the DNA is constrained.
You must suffer from selective memory loss, Joey."
Danny, Danny, Danny, boy, boy, little fellow, your mother was supposed to wash your mouth out with soap for lying, and she failed!
So you keep lying & lying, I blame her in part, and your Dad too, for not strapping you near enough.
Or, who knows, maybe you were just born devious.
But when your lies are so obvious anybody can see them, how "devious" is that?
Do I have to point out the obvious?
Not one of your quotes said anything about any DNA being "constrained" or "restrained" by evolution. ![]()
>>Danny Denier post #410: “Joey I have been responding to one silly post of yours after another, all afternoon. You must be desperate to keep your friends from finding out you are a fraud.”
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “Nah, I’m just trying to keep up with your nonsense.
The only time you have seen any nonsense out of me, Joey, is when I quote you.
****************
>>Danny Denier quoting BJK post #328: “I’m just using your own quotes, did you already forget what you posted?
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “None of your quotes from ENCODE claimed 80% of DNA is “constrained” or “restrained” or even “influenced” by evolution. ENCODE’s numbers were 5% to 10% “constrained” by evolution. Your 95% number comes from a Swiss study, not ENCODE, and even the Swiss nowhere claimed 95% is “constrained” by evolution. Those are your posts, not mine.”
One more time, Joey: ENCODE reported 80% of the genome is functional. Six years later, the Swiss team reported 95 percent of the Genome is under influence. Let’s leave it at that.
****************
>>Danny Denier “Those statements have no basis in reality, Joey. Perhaps you were tired.”
>>That covers Denier Rules #1, #5 & #9.
Child.
****************
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “In fact, my statements you quoted are 100% accurate, at least so far as I’ve seen. I’m still hoping you’ll somehow produce quotes which prove me wrong. But hope is fading fast.
You don’t understand the science, Joey.
****************
>>Danny Denier: “Forget Graur: he is your useless source.”
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “No, Danny denier boy, Graur is your source, I never heard of him. You introduced him here saying you agree (or disagree?) with his trashing of ENCODE.”
He was interviewed in the article you referenced, Joey. Perhaps you should have read the article before referencing it.
****************
>>Danny Denier quoting Science 2012: “A decade-long project, the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE), has found that 80% of the human genome serves some purpose, biochemically speaking.”
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “Sure, I “got that” the first time — 80% has some function, but what percent is “constrained” by evolution?
Constrained means it cannot evolve, Joey; in that case, 80%.
****************
>>Danny Denier quoting Nature 2012: “Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project has systematically mapped regions of transcription, transcription factor association, chromatin structure and histone modification.
These data enabled us to assign biochemical functions for 80% of the genome...”
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “Right, “got it” again — 80% has some sort of function. But what percent is “constrained” by evolution?
Constrained means it cannot evolve, Joey; in that case, 80%.
****************
>>Danny Denier quoting I.C.R. 2013: “Biochemical functions have been determined for at least 80% of the human genome and most of the rest is also predicted to be functional (Dunham, et al., 2012) to at least some degree.”
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “Right, still “got it”, 80% functional but what percent is “constrained” by evolution?
Constrained means it cannot evolve, Joey; in that case, 80%.
****************
>>Danny Denier “As you can see, Science, Nature and ICR all reported that ENCODE claimed 80% of the DNA is constrained. You must suffer from selective memory loss, Joey.”
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “Danny, Danny, Danny, boy, boy, little fellow, your mother was supposed to wash your mouth out with soap for lying, and she failed! So you keep lying & lying, I blame her in part, and your Dad too, for not strapping you near enough. Or, who knows, maybe you were just born devious. But when your lies are so obvious anybody can see them, how “devious” is that?”
I guess that means you haven’t a clue what I am talking about.
****************
>>Joey the Science Denier said: “Do I have to point out the obvious? Not one of your quotes said anything about any DNA being “constrained” or “restrained” by evolution.”
Good. If I said that, I didn’t intend to. Evolution doesn’t exist, except as a fairy tale, so it cannot restrain anything.
Foolish Child.
Mr Kalamata