Lying for Darwin about "Junk" DNA
A few days ago, Jacqueline Hyde, the lady friend of Rusty Swingset from the Darwin Ranch, wanted to meet up with me over at Gravel Gulch. Although an evolutionist, she has some doubts. She also was not happy about recent dishonesty regarding so-called junk DNA.
If interested, you can find the original 1895 photo at Wikimedia Commons, Papa Darwin's image is found all over the web, and the source of the DNA image is at openclipart |
The idea of "junk" DNA was established out of ignorance because the human genome was not yet fully sequenced. In addition, they argued from ignorance, presupposing evolution. Also, because certain areas of the genome did not code for proteins, they were useless junk leftover from our evolution. Although better science showed that the genome is functional, some have the hubris to insist that some is still junk. See how these things work? Presuppositions, arbitrary statements, bad science, silly logic, and more to cling to their evolutionary mythology. It's who they are and what they do.
Biblical creationists knew all along that God doesn't make junk. Things are designed, and designed for specific purposes.
Remember, we need to go on the offensive by asking why, if evolution were true, do people need to be deceitful to con us into believing it? In this case, science deniers who insist that some DNA is junk are saying that it is a key to understanding evolution. They also insist on dysteleology (that God is incompetent) but praise the glories of inefficient and wasteful evolutionary processes that they find "exciting". While the following article praises Intelligent Design, the ID movement does not go far enough; ID proponents do not identify the Creator, who is the God of the Bible.
The headline of a new article in Science News about the findings of a new study announced “A key to the mystery of fast-evolving genes was found in ‘junk DNA’” The details show why some genes rapidly “become crucial because they regulate a type of DNA called heterochromatin. Once considered ‘junk DNA,’ heterochromatin actually performs many important jobs, including acting like a tightly guarded prison: It locks up ‘bad actor’ genes, preventing them from turning on and doing damage.” This new study indicates that what had been called “new genes,” supposedly created by random mutations and favored by natural selection evolution (such as the gene in fish that makes a novel antifreeze), were there all the time. The existing genes were activated when the conditions were appropriate! If this finding is supported, a favorite evidence of the ability of mutations to evolve new genes that produce new traits will have to be added to the many mistakes and blunders of evolutionists! I will report on this research in a future post.
To read the rest, see "More Evidence Refutes Myth of Junk DNA".