Junk DNA: goodbye!: An RNA controls chromosome number (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, December 29, 2015, 20:46 (3042 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: As always, one can fit the facts to one's beliefs. If ”junk” is not junk, your Darwinian scientist can point out that natural selection gets rid of junk. If junk is junk, he can say it's all random. If junk is not junk, your theist can say it's evidence of God's supreme planning. If junk is junk, he can say, “Wait and see.” Or: ”Told you so, we're already 80% of the way there.” Or: “We have no idea how (or why) God did what he did.”-DAVID: Originally 'junk' was proposed as a proof of evolution. With research finding function with what is considered 'junk', useful junk is not junk but functional DNA. Natural selection has nothing to do with it. The issue relates to initial theories proposed by Darwinists before DNA was more clearly understood.
-I think you have missed my point. No matter what discoveries are made about so-called junk, both sides will use them to ”prove” their point. From a materialist atheist standpoint, natural selection would have everything to do with it, because if junk is NOT junk, it can be claimed that natural selection ensures the disappearance of whatever is not needed. The fact that the materialist atheist has to change the original line of argument could be classed as flexibility in the face of new research, just as many religious folk have adjusted from creationism to evolution.