Bible Discussion: "Junk" DNA*

"Junk" DNA*
Posts: 8

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1   (First | Last)

IknowHimDoYou
2003-10-09 12:04:59 EST
"Junk" DNA*

Each time that the evolutionary religionists find new sections of DNA that
they cannot expain they like to call it "junk" as a left over of pond scum
to people. However, let us look at this "junk" with the eye of God and see
what it is there for.

DNA of organisms more complex than bacteria(and they are not "simple")
contains regions called exons that code for proteins, and non-coding
regions called introns. The introns are removed and the exons are
"spliced"(this action in itself is unexplainable by evolution) together to
form mRNA(messenger RNA) that is finally decoded to form protein. All
this comes about by required machinery called a spliceosome which
assembles the intron, chops it out at exactly the right place on the
strand and joins the exons together. All this must be done at exactly in
the right direction and place. If not made correctly there is a huge
difference if the exon is joined just one letter off.

The false religious idea that these more complex organisims should evolve
such elaborate machinery to splice introns if they are relly useless is
absurb. Natural selction, according to the religion of evolution, would
postulate a favoritism for organisms that did not waste resourses
processing a genome filed with 98% "junk".

So here we have yet another terminal blow to the myth of pond scum to
people espoused by the pseudo-scientists.

Next: Discovering Uses for "junk" DNA

Thore Schmechtig
2003-10-09 12:44:02 EST
> ...let us look at this "junk" with the eye of God and see
> what it is there for.

So YOU know exactly what your god sees? Gee, we know you're stupid, but
that you show your hubris so willingly...

Let alone that your whole pseudo-scientific post stands and FALLS with
the interpretation of "junk" DNA... a wrong interpretation as usual
with your babblings.

UNWRITTEN RULES OF FUNDAMENTALISM

1. "I'm right and you are wrong".
2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.
3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.
4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical,
psychological,
or verbal, at all times as defensive
5. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed
into a corner in an argument
6. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.
7. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of
error and correction as part of God's personal plan for you and not as a
something for which you should apologise retract or make amends except
verbally and secretly to God himself
8. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of God's plans
for
the world. Recognise that even your errors are just part of Gods will
for
the betterment of mankind.
9.Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.
10.Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and
oppose all such information through classification of such information
in
a derogatory and simplistic manner(eg by categorising it as left wing
propaganda)
11.Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is
complex and there are shades of grey
12.Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything unless you purport to
forgive on behalf of other people unconnected with you for whom you
don't
have that right anyhow.

Poop Dogg
2003-10-09 17:22:21 EST
"IknowHimDoYou" <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IknowHim-0910030904590001@pm6-39.kalama.com...
> "Junk" DNA*
>
> Each time that the evolutionary religionists find new sections of DNA that
> they cannot expain they like to call it "junk" as a left over of pond scum
> to people. However, let us look at this "junk" with the eye of God and see
> what it is there for.

I doubt xians even believe in DNA. I just read the other day that many
of these introns are actually remnants of ancestral viral infections.
Viruses in the past injected their DNA into a cell and sometimes the
cell was able to survive by deactivating the added DNA and therefore
reproduce successfully, transmitting the deactivated viral DNA to its
offspring. Many other introns probably are sections that code for
traits no longer found in the organism. In other words, we all possess
DNA that codes for things like gills, tentacles, etc. that were used
by the ancestors to our species, but those genes were deactivated and
replaced by different traits over the billenia. In fact, I learned in
biology that human fetuses do develop gills during part of their
development, but then the gills disappear before it is born.

I can't imagine anyone who does not believe in evolution. The very
nature of DNA reproduction suggests evolution. I suppose it is possible
for some ignorant individuals to believe in an instantaneous divine
creation, but then they are unable to explain why an omnipotent god
decided to use the complex mechanism of DNA to make life work. He
should have the power to animate dirt without having to resort to
extremely sophisticated chemical processes. Don't get me wrong, I
do believe in God or at least some higher order of reality from which
the universe emanates, but it appears to me that while the universe
may have been intelligently designed, it is simply a machine designed
to operate on its own with no further intervention - sort of a cosmic
computer calculating something beyond our comprehension. God may
have created the universe, but once created the universe chose the
parameters for the laws of physics, and the laws of physics gave
rise to the chemistry which is the basis of life. I hope I'm making
sense, I know what kind of audience I am trying to reach (ignorant
xians who think the earth is flat because the bible says so).



The Omniscient Blade
2003-10-09 17:49:14 EST

IknowHimDoYou <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IknowHim-0910030904590001@pm6-39.kalama.com...
> "Junk" DNA*
>
> Each time that the evolutionary religionists find new sections of DNA that
> they cannot expain they like to call it "junk" as a left over of pond scum
> to people. However, let us look at this "junk" with the eye of God and see
> what it is there for.
>
> DNA of organisms more complex than bacteria(and they are not "simple")
> contains regions called exons that code for proteins, and non-coding
> regions called introns. The introns are removed and the exons are
> "spliced"(this action in itself is unexplainable by evolution) together to
> form mRNA(messenger RNA) that is finally decoded to form protein. All
> this comes about by required machinery called a spliceosome which
> assembles the intron, chops it out at exactly the right place on the
> strand and joins the exons together. All this must be done at exactly in
> the right direction and place. If not made correctly there is a huge
> difference if the exon is joined just one letter off.

You are talking bollocks here. For a start, a gene does not require an
intron to function correctly, its an insert that has gotten in, but
conveniantly has a mechanism to get itself back out again. Bacteria don't
have them because they can't afford to, the slection preassures on fast
replication force them to have efficient genomes with only the genes that
they are very likely to need to survive in the environments that find
themsleves in most often. If you have a much more efficient energy
production system like eukaryotic cells and don't have to worry as much
about outgrowing other cells, you can afford to keep much more DNA that
doesn't actually code for protein functions. This includes 'structural' DNA
that is there because the system has adapted to having it there and it is
now actually used to order things. You also find transposons, retro viruses
and remnants of these (some introns are transposons). There is also 'junk'
DNA that does nothing, its just there because there is little selection
pressure to remove it. An intron doesn't code for anything and if it wasn't
there, the gene would work the same (unless the intron now has a control
element in the middle of it). You only need the ends of the intron for it to
get spliced out correctly, most of the middle is irrelevant and could be
removed for most introns. The reason we have so many in the genome is that
when you can afford to have them from an energetic POV, they are incredibly
useful as far as evolving goes. You can have a modular genome where
recombination can lump bits of existing genes (and thus proteins) together
to form new genes that might have related functions. This can greatly
increase the rate of adaption to new environments.

>
> The false religious idea that these more complex organisims should evolve
> such elaborate machinery to splice introns if they are relly useless is
> absurb. Natural selction, according to the religion of evolution, would
> postulate a favoritism for organisms that did not waste resourses
> processing a genome filed with 98% "junk".

Introns make up only a small fraction of what is considered to be 'non
coding' DNA. Much of this isn't junk, but some of what doesn't code could
quite safely be removed without detriment.

>
> So here we have yet another terminal blow to the myth of pond scum to
> people espoused by the pseudo-scientists.

What are you talking about? All this post has illustrated is your own
ignorance of molecular genetics.

--
Blade



The Omniscient Blade
2003-10-09 17:56:27 EST

Poop Dogg <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:zqCdnXHUntQSTBiiRTvU2Q@bravo.net...
> "IknowHimDoYou" <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
> news:IknowHim-0910030904590001@pm6-39.kalama.com...
> > "Junk" DNA*
> >
> > Each time that the evolutionary religionists find new sections of DNA
that
> > they cannot expain they like to call it "junk" as a left over of pond
scum
> > to people. However, let us look at this "junk" with the eye of God and
see
> > what it is there for.
>
> I doubt xians even believe in DNA. I just read the other day that many
> of these introns are actually remnants of ancestral viral infections.
> Viruses in the past injected their DNA into a cell and sometimes the
> cell was able to survive by deactivating the added DNA and therefore
> reproduce successfully, transmitting the deactivated viral DNA to its
> offspring. Many other introns probably are sections that code for
> traits no longer found in the organism.

Not quite, some introns are probably remnants from viruses (infact most may
well be, but have mutated to a form that is unrecognisable as such). They
are not inactivated traits, those would be the pseudo genes that look like
existing genes but lack things like start codons, or the upstream and
downstream regulation sites that would activate them. You (should) have
several active (or genes that can be active) versions of the globin genes
that assemble into heamaglobin molecules. However you will also have several
versions of the genes that don't work at all and probably aren't even
transcribed.

>In other words, we all possess
> DNA that codes for things like gills, tentacles, etc. that were used
> by the ancestors to our species, but those genes were deactivated and
> replaced by different traits over the billenia. In fact, I learned in
> biology that human fetuses do develop gills during part of their
> development, but then the gills disappear before it is born.

The gill like structures get modified further into development to become the
bones of the ear. IIRC the same genes that develop gills in fish are
involved in building the ear structures in mammals as well, confirming the
link that is apparent from looking at development.

>
> I can't imagine anyone who does not believe in evolution. The very
> nature of DNA reproduction suggests evolution. I suppose it is possible
> for some ignorant individuals to believe in an instantaneous divine
> creation, but then they are unable to explain why an omnipotent god
> decided to use the complex mechanism of DNA to make life work. He
> should have the power to animate dirt without having to resort to
> extremely sophisticated chemical processes.

He would be constrained by the rules that govern the world that his creation
must live in however.

--
Blade



John Ings
2003-10-09 18:45:08 EST
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 22:49:14 +0100, "The Omniscient Blade"
<*e@mysanctuary.con> wrote:

>What are you talking about? All this post has illustrated is your own
>ignorance of molecular genetics.

The Creationist doesn't care that he reveals his ignorance of science
to those who know better. The intended audience is the innocent who
thinks that because the Creationist can walk-the-walk and
talk-the-talk, he's a genuine scientist . IknowHimDoYou is one such
gullible dupe. He is no more capable of writing a post like that by
himself than he is of understanding the Bible. He copied it from a
Creationist propaganda source, and any attempts to explain to him
where it's wrong just go sailing over his head.

## A fanatic is someone who won't change his mind,
## and won't change the subject
Winston Churchill



Galia
2003-10-09 19:28:15 EST

"Thore Schmechtig" <WRITETOcommoner@carcosa.de> wrote in message
news:bm449p$ho1av$1@ID-87341.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > ...let us look at this "junk" with the eye of God and see
> > what it is there for.
>
> So YOU know exactly what your god sees? Gee, we know you're stupid, but
> that you show your hubris so willingly...

Let's have a look at your beliefs:
http://hyboria.xoth.net/races/human_aesir.htm

Only by dying in battle, with sword or axe in hand and courage in the
heart,
can an Aesir find his way to Valhalla, the after-life paradise sought by
all Norsemen.

The Aesir live by conquest. When two Aesir fight, the winner takes his
choice of the loser's women, children, and animals. Aesir men will have
only
one wife at a time. When they tire of their present wife they either kill or
sell her, and obtain a new female more to their liking. If a woman is
unfaithful to her Aesir husband, she is most often killed by a ritual
called
"the Wheel of Axes", where all who disbelieve her hurl axes at her bound
body. Any man caught in adultery is stripped of his belongings, and forced
to cross the snow plains naked. In this way he freezes to death and never
gains his chance to reside in the Halls of Valhalla. Only a legitimate
wife
can commit adultery, and thus an Aesir man can be frivolous with as many
unmarried women as he wishes




Roy Boyden
2003-10-18 21:21:35 EST

"John Ings" <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message
news:8iobovk3kjp2u3r8b0tqlrk0h0hmsfb56r@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 22:49:14 +0100, "The Omniscient Blade"
> <blade@mysanctuary.con> wrote:
>
> >What are you talking about? All this post has illustrated is your own
> >ignorance of molecular genetics.
>
> The Creationist doesn't care that he reveals his ignorance of science
> to those who know better. The intended audience is the innocent who
> thinks that because the Creationist can walk-the-walk and
> talk-the-talk, he's a genuine scientist . IknowHimDoYou is one such
> gullible dupe. He is no more capable of writing a post like that by
> himself than he is of understanding the Bible. He copied it from a
> Creationist propaganda source, and any attempts to explain to him
> where it's wrong just go sailing over his head.
>
> ## A fanatic is someone who won't change his mind,
> ## and won't change the subject
> Winston Churchill

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
for sure that just ain't so."
Mark Twain

Cheers
Roy


Page: 1   (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron