How the Evolutionist Struck Out on Junk DNA — Part 1

Posted by -
“I keep pitchin' 'em and you keep missin' 'em”
— Foghorn Leghorn

Listen up, folks, we need to have a talk. Ready?

 Proponents of fish-to-fool evolution have several things they throw at us as proof of evolution, hoping we'll believe them. Unfortunately, they are poor, and people believe these bits of "evidence" anyway. Why? Because they want to. One of these is the concept that DNA has "junk" in it.
Striking out evolution junk DNA
Assembled from components at Clker clipart
Evolutionists thought they had a home run with that one! Some of the human genome was sampled, and looked for one function in DNA. With astonishing arrogance, scientists decided that if they could not understand the parts of the genome that they tested for protein coding, the rest must be "junk". Not hardly! They "saw" what they wanted to see based on a junk theory that gives junk predictions, including "junk" DNA. (Of course, Darwin's Drones that rely on biased and fallacious sources like Wikipedia and the like didn't get the memo, and still spread bad scientific information.) Using incomplete science, circular reasoning and other bad logic, blinders on their worldview, evolutionists have spectacularly struck out. More than that, creationists have been pitching all along that DNA is not "junk", it was created for a purpose — and been proved right. Foolish efforts of evolutionists to deny the Creator, yes? Yippie ky yay, Darwinoids!
. . . evolutionary literature gloated for over three decades about evidence evolutionists believed was a powerful confirmation of evolution. Their “proof” was the discovery that a large percentage of DNA they called junk DNA does not code for proteins. Since evolutionists believe that over long ages organisms (and their DNA) are crafted by chaotic environments in which they struggle to survive, evolutionists expect to see in evolution’s wake many different types of  “useless” genetic junk. They were so certain that most non-coding genetic material was junk DNA, some said its only functional ability was embarrassing creationists.
To read the full article, click on "Major Evolutionary Blunders: Evolutionists Strike Out with Imaginary Junk DNA, Part 1". Part 2 is found here.