NEO-DARWINISM JUST DIED: Junk DNA or useful (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, September 11, 2012, 18:44 (4434 days ago) @ David Turell

"ENCODE remains a phenomenally successful effort, one that will continue to pay dividends by accelerating basic science research for decades to come. And the issue of what constitutes junk DNA is likely to remain controversial—I expect we'll continue to find more individual pieces of it that perform useful functions, but the majority will remain evolutionary baggage that doesn't do enough harm for us to eliminate it."-"If the confused coverage of ENCODE has done anything positive, it has provoked a public response by a number of scientists. Their criticisms may help convince their colleagues to be more circumspect in the future. And maybe a few more reporters will be aware that this is an area of genuine controversy, and it will help them identify a few of the scientists they should be talking to when covering it in the future."-http://arstechnica.com/staff/2012/09/most-of-what-you-read-was-wrong-how-press-releases-rewrote-scientific-history/2/ -Only some commentators recognize the 3-D spacing requirements. This fellow doesn't. Also that only a tiny portion of cell types were studied. In future studies more functionality in junk will be found, as more cell types are studied. But there will always be 'spacer junk'