Junk DNA goodbye!: new function discoveries (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, May 10, 2018, 15:08 (2390 days ago) @ dhw

QUOTE: […] how much more will the flood of new discoveries, illustrated by these few examples, persuade the next generation of geneticists that Darwinism is hopelessly inadequate to account for the complexity of life? It’s like having to account for half a dozen codes instead of one. The future looks bright for ID in next-generation genetics, embedded in epigenetics. The nucleus is a whole new ball game."

David’s comment: The genome has all sorts of control and layers of instruction. Darwinism is dead.

dhw: What aspect of Darwinism is “hopelessly inadequate to account for the complexity of life”? What is dead? His theory of evolution begins at Chapter Two of life (i.e. not the beginning), does not and cannot analyse how cells work, and does not exclude the possibility that the mechanisms of life and evolution are the product of design, but in later editions even credits the Creator with having set it all up. His focus was on common descent, which you accept. His reliance on random mutations and gradualism may well prove to be “dead”, but the rest remains and, as I have said repeatedly, the concept of junk DNA has absolutely no bearing on his theory. The fact that some atheistic evolutionists take junk DNA to be evidence of bad or no design is not Darwinism. And in any case, if it’s not junk, they can argue that natural selection preserves what is useful. I do wish you and your fellow ID-ers would vent your spleen on atheistic evolutionists, and would stop pretending that they represent all evolutionists (many of whom are theists), let alone Darwin himself.

Darwinism is the false view of atheist evolutionists that have created a religion espousing a naturalistic explanation for the evolutionary theory of common descent and insisting 'junk DNA' proves it. Nothing more. If Darwin could see this, of course he would be upset. You miss the point.