Darwin evolution going backwards? (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 17:41 (5903 days ago) @ dhw

From an article in The Guardian a few days ago:
> 
> "Early humans may have had help in mastering tools and walking upright from a chunk of DNA that scientists previously wrote off as junk, according to a study [by researchers at Yale and the Medical Research Council's human genetics unit]. The section of DNA - HACNS1 - is thought to have triggered off the development of hands and feet."
> 
> They "analysed DNA from macaques, chimpanzees and humans and identified sequences that appeared similar in all three, suggesting they had survived through history and so likely played a role in growth and development." - This piece from the Guardian is to my way of thinking another example of front-end loading. Mt thesis is a combination of taking Darwin's Theory, evolution as a fact, and evidence for intelligent design and arriving at a different way of looking at the issue. What must be accepted is evolution occurred, the universe is 13.7 billion years old, the Earth is 4.5 billion years old and life started (really jump-started) about 3.7 billion years ago. Junk DNA is not junk DNA. It is filled with regulatory RNA that permits making humans out of 25,000 genes, while simple organisms like a sea anemone may have 8-10,000 genes (I've forgotten the exact number). Many of the important gene combinations in our DNA are ancient! I suspect science will find that much RNA is ancient also, but not yet activated to create more complexity seen in the emergence of more recent animals and plants. The RNA activation lead to the Cambrian Explosion. Was the activation coded into the process or spontaneous? Or triggered by environmental changes, specifically more oxygen in the atmosphere (which did occur at that time)? Part of my reasoning is all of the hidden information in DNA/RNA code which is uncovered by mutation, error transfers, or new RNA activity. I cannot believe that raw inorganic material of the early universe could have converted into a monster coded program without design. - What George didn't answer in my questions about explaning the Cambrian Explosion, is how did it occur so quickly, without intermediate forms required by Darwin, knowing the mutation rates that have been established, even assuming they were doubled or tripled? My answer is in the RNA. To use the Darwin excuse of there was time for one step at a time is answered by Cambrian. It was one huge giant step in a short time with huge changes in morphology, and the arrival of new organ systems: for example, early forms had very simple neural webs, but it is quite a jump to a nervous system with a notochord, as in the Pikaia of the Cambrian.