Is junk DNA present before the organisms needs it?

Posted in the Evolution Debate Forum

Comments
1 - 20 of 21 Comments Last updated May 21, 2013
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
May 14, 2013
 
" http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2013/04/105126/brain... ;

" http://news.discovery.com/earth/plants/junk-d... ;

In one article Junk DNA is called Junk while in the other it is not. It would seem to imply the DNA molecule has program code in advance of the organisms need for it. It would place a great strain on the present idea of how evolution occurs if the same Junk DNA used by the brain is also present in organisms without out a brain .
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
May 14, 2013
 
" http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplaine... ;

In this article it states that many different species share the same junk DNA coding. Would this indicate the coding preceded the need for it? It would appear DNA coding in earlier organisms was written in Ďanticipationí of a later need for it. If this is true, the theory of evolution will have to be rewritten.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Paul WV wrote:
" http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplaine... ;
In this article it states that many different species share the same junk DNA coding. Would this indicate the coding preceded the need for it? It would appear DNA coding in earlier organisms was written in Ďanticipationí of a later need for it. If this is true, the theory of evolution will have to be rewritten.
What it says is that species that share homologous pieces of so called junk DNA likely share a common ancestor. If we don't know what most of this DNA does you can't really ascribe a function (need?) for it. In fact the function of much of these noncoding regions is still up for grabs.

No it isn't true. The genes that code for a protein have been selected for based on the real time value they provide. What you are suggesting is that a trait evolved prior to the selection pressure that would have selected for that trait. It just doesn't happen that way. It would be as if you won the lottery Monday and bought the ticket Tuesday. But if you did find fully functional gills on a hummingbird, it would likely refute the current theory. Good luck with that.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
May 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

PaulWV wrote:

" http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplaine... ;
In this article it states that many different species share the same junk DNA coding. Would this indicate the coding preceded the need for it?
No, it would merely indicate common ancestry.
PaulWV wrote:
It would appear DNA coding in earlier organisms was written in Ďanticipationí of a later need for it.
Or it would simply mean superfluous genetic material gets co-adapted later.
PaulWV wrote:
If this is true, the theory of evolution will have to be rewritten.
Not really, it would not affect common ancestry. All it would mean is that evolution is goal-directed. Hence if this is true you would need to provide evidence of this invisible magic Jew wizard and the mechanisms you propose that it made use of in order to do whatever it is exactly you think it did.
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
May 15, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it would merely indicate common ancestry.
<quoted text>
Or it would simply mean superfluous genetic material gets co-adapted later.
<quoted text>
Not really, it would not affect common ancestry. All it would mean is that evolution is goal-directed. Hence if this is true you would need to provide evidence of this invisible magic Jew wizard and the mechanisms you propose that it made use of order to do whatever it is exactly you think it did.
So evolution is 'goal-directed'? Who/what sets the 'goal'? What is the 'goal' of evolution?
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
May 15, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it would merely indicate common ancestry.
<quoted text>
Or it would simply mean superfluous genetic material gets co-adapted later.
<quoted text>
Not really, it would not affect common ancestry. All it would mean is that evolution is goal-directed. Hence if this is true you would need to provide evidence of this invisible magic Jew wizard and the mechanisms you propose that it made use of in order to do whatever it is exactly you think it did.
So evolution has a purpose: to reach the 'goal'!

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
May 15, 2013
 
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
So evolution is 'goal-directed'? Who/what sets the 'goal'? What is the 'goal' of evolution?
I believe you misunderstand. Evolution is not directed.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
May 15, 2013
 
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
So evolution has a purpose: to reach the 'goal'!
Again, you didn't read the post you responded to. Your conclusion is incorrect.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
May 15, 2013
 
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
So evolution is 'goal-directed'?
No.
Paul WV wrote:
Who/what sets the 'goal'? What is the 'goal' of evolution?
No.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
May 15, 2013
 
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
So evolution has a purpose: to reach the 'goal'!
Still no.
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
May 18, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
<quoted text>
No.
What about 'natural selection'?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
May 19, 2013
 
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
What about 'natural selection'?
What about it?
imagine2011

Southaven, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
May 19, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
What about it?
Isn't that what Hitler used and gave an extra push to kill off the "inferior race" (in his opinion) by using Darwins teachings?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
May 19, 2013
 
imagine2011 wrote:
Isn't that what Hitler used and gave an extra push to kill off the "inferior race" (in his opinion) by using Darwins teachings?
No. The Nazis promoted eugenics which is about limiting genetic variance through the use of ARTIFICIAL selection, giving rise to the myth of the blonde-haired blue-eyed white skinned super strong "perfect humans", the Aryans. This flies right in the face of NATURAL selection which is about increasing genetic variance by the production of groups to fill every available environmental niche.

As for Hitler's personal views, like much of the Nazi attitude back then they were based on the writings of the Protestant anti-semite Martin Luther, whose writings were popular in Germany during the early 20th century. This led to his motivations being along the lines of:
Hitler wrote:
I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
May 19, 2013
 
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't that what Hitler used and gave an extra push to kill off the "inferior race" (in his opinion) by using Darwins teachings?
Are you just going to waste time on this thread pulling up ancient and much refuted claims. You are a tool Satan because you come on here to lie and do evil.

“I'm Your Huckleberry ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

That's Just My Game

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
May 20, 2013
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Are you just going to waste time on this thread pulling up ancient and much refuted claims. You are a tool Satan because you come on here to lie and do evil.
But if you believe there is no God,,, then there can be no Satan.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
May 20, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
But if you believe there is no God,,, then there can be no Satan.
Holy shit!

He has a clue!

“I'm Your Huckleberry ”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

That's Just My Game

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
May 20, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy shit!
He has a clue!
lol Sub. Just saying he says there is no God so there can be no Satan by his belief. So by him calling some one Satan, it means absolutely nothing for it is something that is non-existent in his thoughts and beliefs. lol.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
May 21, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
lol Sub. Just saying he says there is no God so there can be no Satan by his belief. So by him calling some one Satan, it means absolutely nothing for it is something that is non-existent in his thoughts and beliefs. lol.
It's called arguing within your opponent's premises. It's a way of taking them to their logical conclusion to expose their flaws. We do it all the time with fundies.

There COULD be a God that is ultimately responsible for magically poofing the universe into existence. There COULD even be an evil red guy who acts as his arch nemesis. Only problem with the God "hypothesis" is that it's not scientific, as it's not like God puts its arm down every now and then so we can confirm its validity with a blood test or something. But if we assume that such an entity exists for the sake of argument, the problem is that fundies ALWAYS lie when promoting their claims, which is a gross violation of the 9th Commandment. Meaning they are in deepshit. Or they can just be massive hypocrites and repent at the last second. But his point would be correct that due to the fundie lying they COULD be under the thrall of the devil and hence not to be trusted by anyone, theists or atheists alike.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
May 21, 2013
 
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
But if you believe there is no God,,, then there can be no Satan.
You are an idiot. I never have said what my beliefs are anywhere where you have read them. If you had, you wouldn't make stupid and erroneous statements. Never mind, you make stupid and erroneous statements as a matter of your daily routine.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••