Bob B posted:
Evolutionists have been saying for years that non-coding (for proteins) DNA is "junk", leftovers that have accumulated from random mutations during millions of years of evolution from a primitive protocell.
Dimo:
That is not entirely correct. It is not "junk". That is an oversimplification. DNA effects enzyme production. Slight modifications to DNA can create large changes in these enzymes. Large modifications in DNA may produce little or no enzyme changes. The overall effect of all this is much too intricate and complex to explain here. However, the concept of "junk" DNA is a word that the laymen has grasped onto, because some genotype changes lead to little or no changes in the phenotype. This communication problem is created by the knowledge gap between genetics experts and the laymen. And YECs like yourself like to hold this out and say "Look evolutionists have been wrong all along".
Bob B posted:
Creationists on the other hand have been saying for years that the so-called "junk" DNA undoubtedly has a function that simply has not been discovered as yet, and that it would be a good idea to stop calling it "junk" and get to work finding out what its function is.
Dimo:
Is that so? Which creationists have said this?
Bob B posted:
Most evolutionists have ignored this advice, but fortunately a few less dogmatic individuals have not, and lo and behold, functions are now rapidly being discovered as the "logjam" in thinking has been weakened.
Dimo:
I would like to see some evidence for this claim. Like a testimony from those who freed up the "logjam", that this freedom of thinking is because of the YEC influence on science.
Bob B posted:
Of course, the same thing happened in the case of antibiotic resistence which originally had been thought to have been due to random mutation, but which is now known to be anything but random.
Dimo:
In this case it turns out that this is due to a type of Lamarckian mechanism. Newer research is showing evidence that Lamarkian concepts make a great deal of sense when it comes to simpler organisms, or organs and organelles found in more complex organisms.
Do you have evidence that this is actually due to pressures placed on research by YECs?
Bob B posted:
Let us hope less dogmatic young researchers take these lessons to heart and stop following the siren song of "random mutations", and so get to work in earnest finding out how the marvellous features of lifeforms really operate.
Dimo:
And they will have a much greater chance of this if they steer clear of the YEC mentality; "That some questions in the material sciences just cannot be answered , because they are the result of the supernatural."
