Evolution called a lot of DNA "junk DNA". Had scientists listened to them, they might have quit investigating.
Evolution called various human organs and features "vestigal" and some medical people believed them. We now know that there are no vestigal organs in the human body that do not have function.
Evolution really contributes very little to science and the study of God's design. In some cases it actually gets in the way.
or
are all those monkoids deteriorated, degenerated democrats? Keep digging deeper, there should more older bones there. Seriesly!
so who exactly are "evolution" as opposed to "scientists".
|Do you have any idea what percentage of "junk" DNA has a known function?
And which creation scientists are at work decoding the function of the rest Name some of them.
This is just goofy, Danny. A "lot of DNA" was called "junk DNA" not because "evolution" called it that (you're not even making any *sense* there), but because there was good evidenciary reason to conclude that it served no function. And there still is. Nonetheless, contrary to your cartoon version of science (your scenarios are all remarkably childish and bear little if any resemblance to the reality), it's not like "evolution" pronounced that certain DNA was "junk" and then scientists "listened" to that pronouncement and ignored it thereafter but certain other "scientists" refused to "listen" and conducted clandestine research and discovered otherwise... (*sheesh*, man...).
Instead, research advances on "junk DNA" has been done the way science is always done -- by various scientists following various lines of evidence and fortuitous discoveries wherever they lead, without any "listening to" or "not listening to" prior provisional conclusions.
Please learn something about how science is done before you again misrepresent it, please. Bearing false witness in the way you frequently do is inexcusable.
Furthermore, contrary to your implications, the vast majority of what is considered "junk DNA" still *is* known to be junk, and has been confirmed as such in multiple different ways.
Evolution called various human organs and features "vestigal" and some medical people believed them. We now know that there are no vestigal organs in the human body that do not have function.
This is just ridiculous. You have again misrepresented both how science is done, as well as the history of medical understanding of certain organs.
But worse, you grossly misunderstand and misrepresent the nature of vestigial organs -- there is *no* requirement that they actually "do not have a function" in order to be classified as vestigial. Are you sure you know what in the hell you're talking about?
Furthermore, you're wrong when you say that "there are no vestigal organs in the human body that do not have function" -- an obvious counterexample is "wisdom teeth". Their sole function seems to be enriching oral surgeons.
Finally, you were dishonestly trying to divert attention from many obvious examples by specifying "in the human body" in your screed. For example, there are beetle species which have fully formed wings forever trapped under fused wing cases, Mexican tetra fish have a lens, a degenerate retina, a degenerate optic nerve, and a sclera, even though the fish is blind.
Yes Virginia, there *are* vestigial features...
Evolution really contributes very little to science and the study of God's design. In some cases it actually gets in the way.
You can believe that fairy tale if you wise. I'll stick with reality.