Source.  Redacted.

Junk Darwinian science, has produced much detritus which impedes rational thinking and coherence.  Junk DNA is just another example of conflating philosophy with biological functioning.  It is also a self-refuting exercise.  Darwinism proposes ‘survival of the fittest’ (whatever that means), and that biologically everything must improve.  If that is true, how can Darwinists explain their own theory of Junk DNA?  Wouldn’t humans with little to no ‘Junk DNA’ be conferred an ‘advantage’ and ‘evolve’ more quickly and dominate those with too much ‘Junk DNA’? 

But, as usual with Darwinism, Junk DNA theorising is just junk. 

‘Junk DNA’ a theory of ignorance

It was believed that the vast majority of the genome was junk because the genome contains molecular mile after mile of redundant sequences, chains of nucleotide pairs that are repeated endlessly for no apparent reason.  Other ‘experts’ cry that ‘evolution’ has written off broken genes and viruses that are ‘stuck’ in the genome serving no purpose.  95% of DNA material was thought of as ‘junk’ driven by mutations which supersede previous genetic material.  Almost all mutations are however, either negative or neutral.  Evolutionists counter that since most of our DNA is ‘junk’ this should not matter.

Stanford Nobelist Paul Berg did not agree with the Darwinists and started a program to understand every single nucleotide in our DNA.  Now the entire human genome is sequenced.  When analysing nucleotides, it is clear that Junk DNA is a myth.  Non-coding regions (based on many studies), ‘promote’ genes.  Promoters are short DNA sequences located upstream of a gene where the required regulatory elements can bind. The binding process is required for DNA to be transcribed to RNA. Without it, a gene will not be properly transcribed and expressed, or will not be transcribed at all. In one study on mice, promoters were erased and this resulted in the death of the mice pups because this DNA sequence, once thought of just as “junk DNA,” has a critical role both in cell proliferation and the timing of embryo implantation in mice. Similar promoters are found in many mammals, including humans.  Darwinists claim that promoters are from viruses ‘millions of years old’ which invaded the genome and caused promoters to function.  This is obviously absurd.  How did humans or their ’ancestors’ survive until this occurred? 

A More Logical Solution

It is far more logical to assume the promoter was designed to function inside the cell in the role it now plays. It was this role which researchers at University of California, Berkeley, and Washington University explored. The claim that these misnamed “selfish DNA sequences [are] able to invade their host genome,” and play a critical role in viability of the mouse, and perhaps in all mammals, is not based on evidence. That it plays a critical role was already documented when the researchers “knocked out a specific transposon [gene] in mice and half of their pups died before birth.”

The promoter regulates the proliferation of cells in the early fertilized embryo and the timing of implantation in the mother’s uterus. The researchers looked in seven other mammalian species, including humans, and also found [claimed] virus-derived regulatory elements linked to cell proliferation and timing of embryo implantation, suggesting that ancient viral DNA has been domesticated independently to play a crucial role in early embryonic development in all mammals.

Magic happens

Viruses-to promoters is another Darwin-magic fantasy.  Apparently the human heart ‘evolved’ from a fish heart.  Viruses that promote genes likewise flew from fish to human and ‘evolved’ functionality.  This is inane.  Different species have different transposons (type of promoters) that are expressed in pre-implantation embryos, but the global expression profiles of these transposons are nearly identical among all the mammalian species.  This means there is a yawning  chasm between mammals and the animals they are believed to have ‘evolved’ from.  Again it is all or nothing.  You can’t ‘evolve’ genetic functionality and expect that species to survive until magic happens and the happy virus invades the genome (how, why, and in how many?), and allows full genetic functionality to be enjoyed, passed on during the embryonic process for example, when genes are passed on.  What happened before this magical viral appearance then?

“Junk DNA,” is not worthless but critically important, and is just another one of many examples where the evolutionary worldview has impeded research. It is exactly akin to the evolutionists’ vestigial-organ myth, where they wrongly claimed that a host of human body parts and anatomical structures were useless ancestral leftovers. Historically, over 100 organs were assumed to be vestigial, i.e., junk, but after a century of further research, all of them have been documented to be functional. In many cases, they are very important for health. Likewise, the claim that a regulatory gene, now documented to be “critical to survival in mammals,” was due to a viral invasion of a pre-mammal cell is also irrational. The most obvious explanation is that it was designed to serve a “crucial role” in mammals from the very beginning.