Scientists Vie To Break Junk DNA's Secret Code

The Telegraph (UK) ^ | Roger Highfield

[Blood of Tyrants]

Huge tracts of human DNA, previously written off as meaningless junk

Translation: In our arrogance we dismissed as meaningless that which we could not understand.

[Support Free Republic]

We Replaced Patrick Leahy's Brains With Folger's Crystals. Let's See If Anyone Notices!
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[ElkGroveDan]

Prof Antonarakis said: "I suspect that mutations in CNGs may contribute to numerous genetic disorders."

[strela]

Huge tracts of human DNA, previously written off as meaningless junk, have been found to contain a hitherto unrecognised "genetic grammar", making the language of our genes much more complex than previously thought.

An old quote comes to mind: "God doesn't make junk."

[NetValue]

ping

[NewRomeTacitus]

Another good saying is "Nature abhors a vacuum". What does one expect from a society whose members buy "junk bonds", watches "junk entertainment" and pack away too much "junk in their trunk"?

[Ready4Freddy]

....while eating junk food...

[Southack]

Who woulda thunk it...

[BiffWondercat]

HERVs and Introns

[Wacka]

Nothing really new. Scientists have been saying for years that "junk" DNA may have an unknown function, possibly structural (involved in conserving chromosomal 3-D structure). This is just some more conformation of that. Nothing specific though.

[MonroeDNA]

DNA is the history of our evolution.

[gore3000]

Translation: In our arrogance we dismissed as meaningless that which we could not understand.

Only evolutionists, real scientists knew very well that the rest has tremendous importance. In fact the reason why cancer was not understood for decades was due to the emphasis on the genes themselves rather than on how they worked. Cancer is in almost all cases a problem of improper gene expression. The very involved mechanism which tells a cell when to duplicate somehow goes awry and this causes cancer. This information, this control is not to be found in the gene, but the rest of the DNA which the evolutionists deceitfully or ignorantly called junk.

[gore3000]

DNA is the history of our evolution.

That is the kind of arrogance and uninformed nonsense that evolutionists have been spewing and has been completely refuted by science. Only evos would be so stupid and/or dishonest to claim that 95% of DNA is junk just there so they could prove their stupid theory. Evolution has done more harm to science and consequently killed numerous people with their dishonest arrogance.

[MonroeDNA]

God invented evolution.

[gore3000]

God invented evolution.

If he did then it was certainly not Darwinian evolution. If God did it then life and the species were intelligently designed.

[BiffWondercat]

Mutagenic compounds, of course play no role in this.
Nor more then the Estrogenic substances, that are quite harmless of course.

These cells not only have mastered the art of repairing their telomeres, they also seem able to establish a vasular system to support it.

That 'junk' that you ridicule has not been overlooked by all.

I find mitochondrial DNA very interesting...

[AdamSelene235]

Nobelist Kary Mullis back in 1998 wrote:

We live with an uncountable number of retroviruses. They're everywhere -- and they probably have been here as long as the human race. We have them in our genome. We get some of them from our mothers in the form of new viruses -- infectious viral particles that can move from mother to fetus. We get others from both parents along with our genes. We have resident sequences in our genome that are retroviral. That means that we can and do make our own retroviral particles some of the time. Some of them may look like H.I.V. No one has shown that they've ever killed anyone before.

There's got to be a purpose for them; a sizable fraction of our genome is comprised of human endogenous retroviral sequences. There are those who claim that we carry useless D.N.A., but they're wrong. If there is something in our genes, there's a reason for it. We don't let things grow on us. I have tried to put irrelevant gene sequences into things as simple as bacteria. If it doesn't serve some purpose, the bacteria get rid of it right away. I assume that my body is at least as smart as bacteria when it comes to things like D.N.A.

[gore3000]

That 'junk' that you ridicule has not been overlooked by all.

You need to reread my posts. I do not ridicule the 'junk' DNA. It is the evolutionists that ridicule it. In fact, I think it is the most important part of living things.

I find mitochondrial DNA very interesting...

I do too, it is at the very heart of non-plant organisms. It is the source of the energy for life's functions, and it is amazing what it does.

[BiffWondercat]

If you're trolling for a fish, better skip off the bottom.