I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.... Psalm 139:14
"When did the concept of “junk DNA” get going? It began when genetic researchers made a curious finding in the early 1970s. They observed that over 95% of DNA did not code for proteins.
Some DNA was characterized in perplexing ways, such as long strings of repeated code that almost seemed like gibberish. Highlighting how evolutionary theory consistently fosters the practice of poor science methodology, many evolutionists hastily labelled that huge segment of DNA as “junk” beginning with geneticist Susumu Ohno. Ohno explains,
Evolutionary researchers believed they had discovered genomic fossils and other genetic wreckage that were the supposed
byproducts of nature blindly “tinkering” around with the DNA of organisms during the eons of their envisioned evolution.
Evolutionists pounced on the existence of this so called “junk DNA” as both evidence for its evolutionary origin and as a strong argument against DNA being intelligently designed. A popular historian of science, Michael Shermer contrasts these two explanations for DNA’s origin.
Today, Dr. Komiya could not have presented a more contrary assessment of the importance of this research saying,
Vital indeed.
Many discoveries identifying essential purposes for non-coding DNA spotlight how the whole concept of “junk DNA” constitutes yet another major evolutionary blunder.
....seems the whole complex system of which microRNA2118 is a key element may be rapidly “adaptive under various environments…[that] may be a reproductive strategy to prosper offspring, including a novel adaptive mechanism for an environmental response.”
Evolutionists gloated for over three decades that the existence of so many different types of useless genetic junk fit evolutionary
expectations perfectly.
But a large volume of research along the lines of Komiya’s over the last decade has shown that their theory led them into another spectacular blunder. Instead, regulatory genetic material does fit an engineering-based framework for biology and models to explain biological function like ICR’s continuous environmental tracking (CET) model for adaptation."
ICR
"When did the concept of “junk DNA” get going? It began when genetic researchers made a curious finding in the early 1970s. They observed that over 95% of DNA did not code for proteins.
Some DNA was characterized in perplexing ways, such as long strings of repeated code that almost seemed like gibberish. Highlighting how evolutionary theory consistently fosters the practice of poor science methodology, many evolutionists hastily labelled that huge segment of DNA as “junk” beginning with geneticist Susumu Ohno. Ohno explains,
More than 90% degeneracy contained within our genome should be kept in mind when we consider evolutional changes in genome sizes. What is the reason behind this degeneracy?…The earth is strewn with fossil remains of extinct species; is it a wonder that our genome too is filled with the remains of extinct genes? Triumphs as well as failures of nature’s past experiments appear to be contained in our genome.
Evolutionary researchers believed they had discovered genomic fossils and other genetic wreckage that were the supposed
Evolutionists pounced on the existence of this so called “junk DNA” as both evidence for its evolutionary origin and as a strong argument against DNA being intelligently designed. A popular historian of science, Michael Shermer contrasts these two explanations for DNA’s origin.
Today, Dr. Komiya could not have presented a more contrary assessment of the importance of this research saying,
This study shows that non-coding RNAs, derived from regions of the genome that were thought to be non-functional, are vital for plant reproduction. Exploring non-coding RNAs further is an exciting and important area of research.
Vital indeed.
“Rather than being intelligently designed” Shermer said, “the human genome looks more and more like a mosaic of mutations, fragmented copies, borrowed sequences, and discarded strings of DNA that were jerry-built over millions of years of evolution.”
Many discoveries identifying essential purposes for non-coding DNA spotlight how the whole concept of “junk DNA” constitutes yet another major evolutionary blunder.
....seems the whole complex system of which microRNA2118 is a key element may be rapidly “adaptive under various environments…[that] may be a reproductive strategy to prosper offspring, including a novel adaptive mechanism for an environmental response.”
Evolutionists gloated for over three decades that the existence of so many different types of useless genetic junk fit evolutionary
But a large volume of research along the lines of Komiya’s over the last decade has shown that their theory led them into another spectacular blunder. Instead, regulatory genetic material does fit an engineering-based framework for biology and models to explain biological function like ICR’s continuous environmental tracking (CET) model for adaptation."
ICR