Thursday, September 06, 2012

"Junk DNA" Junked: Another Good Day For Intelligent Design

Junked cars stored at an auto scrapyard photog...
Junked cars stored at an auto scrapyard photographed in Fort Washington, Maryland, USA. Category:Buick Century Category:Junk yards (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The more I read, the more convinced I become that philosophical darwinism is absolutely false, and scientific darwinism fatally flawed, i.e. insufficient to adequately explain the intricacies and, yes, complexities of life. The deeper we go, the more life reeks of design.

Another good day for intelligent design; another bad day for Dawkins.

Junk No More: ENCODE Project Nature Paper Finds "Biochemical Functions for 80% of the Genome"

And that's the way the Ball bounces.
Enhanced by Zemanta

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Because the only reasonable thing to do if you don't understand it is to say "oh well, it must be magic", right, Richard?
SDC

Anonymous said...

Anoy, methinks you are missing the point. Scientists didn't know what certain parts of the DNA structure did, so they dubed it 'junk' based on their own bias

Rob West
Ottawa

Anon1152 said...

"The more I read, the more convinced I become that philosophical darwinism is absolutely false, and scientific darwinism fatally flawed,"

That isn't surprising given what you've been reading.

Anon1152 said...

I knew this sounded familiar!

Yesterday, PZ Myers "tweeted" about it in reference to a washington post article: http://m.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/junk-dna-concept-debunked-by-new-analysis-of-human-genome/2012/09/05/cf296720-f772-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_story.html



https://twitter.com/pzmyers/status/243459407378268160

https://twitter.com/pzmyers/status/243460162826928128

https://twitter.com/pzmyers/status/243461550474678272

https://twitter.com/pzmyers/status/243461752707231744

Anonymous said...

No, Rob, methinks YOU are missing the point; when we don't know something, the correct thing to do is to continue STUDYING it and to collect evidence so that we can determine the truth. Opposed to this, we have the classic religionist tactic of saying "it's too complex, and we don't understand this, so the real answer must be that an invisible magic man in the sky did this". Can you tell me how well that has worked out for our species in the past, on everything from disease and earthquakes, to lightning and eclipses?
SDC

RkBall said...

Rob - " so they dubbed it 'junk' based on their own bias".

Right.

RkBall said...

"That isn't surprising given what you've been reading."

Anon1152: thank you!

"... nothing intellectually compelling or challenging.. bald assertions coupled to superstition... woefully pathetic"