Junk DNA: goodbye! (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, July 28, 2014, 18:28 (3772 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: No-one is claiming that bacterial intelligence is the same as human consciousness. The parallel lies in the capacity for processing information, communicating, and taking decisions.-Agreed, but with the proviso that those processes are automatic.-
> dhw: Either detailed plans for adaptations and innovations are already present in all life forms (= preprogramming), or they have to be worked out by the organisms themselves as and when the need or opportunity arises (= autonomous intelligence). Even the tiniest details must work perfectly or the response will fail.-Again, agreed, with the proviso that while the organisms are adapting they are doing it automatically within certain genetically provided guidelines of response.
> 
> 
> dhw: You have been quoting ENCODE on this thread, which is what I meant when I said “scientists themselves can't agree”. ENCODE scientists claim 80% function, Oxford scientists claim to have found very different figures. So long as there is no scientific consensus, how can the layman believe or disbelieve the claims of the different researchers, let alone the conclusions they draw from them?- "How" is by following what I report of continous findings since ENCODE of more and more functions by other researchers. It seems never ending and all the while junk shrinks. The patern is obvious. Look to the future. The exact %age of junk is continuously shrinking. At some point we will find the right figure representing junk, but the Darwinists use junk as a proof of evolution by pointing to discarded DNA from the past. Only much of it is not discarded. Junk =s Darwin-type evolution, and loss of junk suggests Darwin-type evolution is not correct.