Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: mas cerveza por favor
You are misinformed, which is all too typical from Creationist sources. They know that the average education level of their target audience is below average - and they tailor the message thusly.

Endogenous retroviral sequences are “junk” DNA. Pseudogenes are “junk” DNA. Short repeat sequences are “junk” DNA.

Which is not to say that they are of no use. The “junk” in the basement may or may not be of use someday - but it is not presently being used - so it is deemed “junk”.

46 posted on 11/29/2011 1:30:55 PM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: allmendream
You are misinformed, which is all too typical from Creationist sources. They know that the average education level of their target audience is below average - and they tailor the message thusly. Endogenous retroviral sequences are “junk” DNA. Pseudogenes are “junk” DNA. Short repeat sequences are “junk” DNA.

No. DNA information consists of recursive computer-like functions that build structural proteins and nucleic acids. The so-called non-coding or "junk" DNA components actually interact with proteins as they are constructed.

http://junkdna.com/pellionisz_principle

58 posted on 11/29/2011 2:02:50 PM PST by mas cerveza por favor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: allmendream

I might add that the recently discovered sophistication of DNA is one of the many conclusive proofs against macro-evolution since even the simplest of organisms are now know to be unfathomably complex. The structural nature of organisms precludes the remotest possibility of adding useful genetic information through mutation.


66 posted on 11/29/2011 2:28:44 PM PST by mas cerveza por favor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

To: allmendream
I have one question for you if evolution is the survival of the fittest does it not seem odd that all through out nature it requires a male and female to pro create. In all the diversity of nature which came first the male or the female and is it not quite a dicey situation that it takes two to procreate? How many things grew and died and did not find another mutation that fit it's genetic code to procreate and how does or did two different plants animals and such know what or who was there's opposite match so to say. Quit a very in effective way to evolve having two to make one offspring.
96 posted on 11/29/2011 9:06:06 PM PST by guitarplayer1953 (Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to GOD! Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson