Dna

[slipknottin]

At least since I was in high school (>=10 years ago), scientists having been working to get people to stop using the term "junk DNA". Don't think that biologists are being blindsided by the fact that the noncoding DNA is functional.

Yup, thats what I learned as well. I believe they realized long ago that most/all of the DNA has a purpose, but this 'junk DNA' does not code for any specific proteins. So it 'seems' useless; at least compared to the other DNA.

Most people dont understand scientific terminology for things anyways. Heck, most people think theories are just unproven laws...

 

[ash]

Right- there is a huge difference between the way the word theory is used in the common everyday vernacular sense and the way the scientific community uses the word. It's just a bit too easy to belittle an idea by saying that it is 'just a theory' Gravity is a theory- we know what it does but not exactly what it is. We see the effects but not the force itself. Lots of things are theories. Theories are serious things in the scientific sense.

 

[nursie]

I have never been able to understand why the evolution theory camps and the creationism camps feel that their theories are mutually exclusive of each other. (OOPS..almost created a religious debate thread here..) Could not the Creator wrought His creations by means of evolution? I know there is "documentation" that things were done in "days". Lets look at the big picture here: How many translations have those words gone through? And could the definitation of "days" not have changed from when things started on earth until now?

Also to the "junk" DNA..I would say it's only "junk" becasue we've not figured out what it does yet. True, we have things in our bodies that have no function now, like the appendix, but who knows what that used to be? You will have the occasional bably born with a "tail" remnant. We have evolved and changed. There is evidence within ourselves now that we have.

 

[Watcher74]

That's the great thing about science. But a lot of people hate it.

Scientifically we say that something "seems" to be this way. But who knows? Does it work in a certain sense? Well...yeah. Is it independently verified? Well...so far.

Ok, let's wait for a few decades...

Still seems to hold up?

So far.

Ok, let's say it's a law. But we'll remove that title if someone proves it wrong.

Ok.

No one says, "This is the way it is. So go scr.w yourself if you disagree."

It works.

With only 200 years of modern scientific experiment we have gone from horse and buggy to exploring the universe.

It works.

Amazingly well.

I can throw fish in a new tank and pray to a being for them to live.

Or I can study why they appear to die or not and make changes based on those observations.

And amazingly...it works.

Why do people hate it? Because no one says, "This is the answer...Black and White. Love it or leave it." They just say, "This seems to work...what do you think?"

And it works. It makes sense. It produces results. It makes everything happen the way we want it to happen.

 

[JesseJ]

No DNA is useless. There had to have been some reason for it to remain in our system or else it would slowly be purged as that DNA did nothing to help it's organism survive.

Some DNA chains were useful to people in the past but no longer do anything for us. Some of the so-called useless DNA is probibly leftover chains we had but stopped needing thousands of years ago. Some of it might be the beginnings of new genes, like radiation/pollution resistances or something like that to help us survive in our environment.

 

[Riso-chan]

I have never been able to understand why the evolution theory camps and the creationism camps feel that their theories are mutually exclusive of each other. (OOPS..almost created a religious debate thread here..) Could not the Creator wrought His creations by means of evolution? I know there is "documentation" that things were done in "days". Lets look at the big picture here: How many translations have those words gone through? And could the definitation of "days" not have changed from when things started on earth until now?

Also to the "junk" DNA..I would say it's only "junk" becasue we've not figured out what it does yet. True, we have things in our bodies that have no function now, like the appendix, but who knows what that used to be? You will have the occasional bably born with a "tail" remnant. We have evolved and changed. There is evidence within ourselves now that we have.

I agree with you completely on everything you said, nursie. It's one of the wonderous things about science that we discover more and more about who we are and who we once were and just how far we've come. It also helps us realize the many relationships we have with other organisms, as well as understanding things about these creatures we live with on Earth, and the incredible adaptations that have allowed them to survive. I always wonder why we humans couldn't evolve some of those cool traits that other animals have...I envy animals : I think it'd be cool to have fangs, but then you'd have to find a good use for them. Probably could use them in a situation where someone was trying to attack you in a parking lot, then turn around and latch on to'em! Gotta admit they'd be a bit freaked out by someone with sharp teeth trying to bite them.

 

[mrakins]

I always wonder why we humans couldn't evolve some of those cool traits that other animals have...I envy animals

Or, heck, who on this board wouldn't love a set of gills? :dive2:

 

[OrionGirl]

No DNA is useless. There had to have been some reason for it to remain in our system or else it would slowly be purged as that DNA did nothing to help it's organism survive.

That's not actually true. Organisms evolve features and forms that are beneficial. If a specific feature or trait is benign--ie, confers neither benefit nor disadvantage, there is no pressure to get rid of it. Check out Panda thumbs sometime--absolutely no benefit, not used at all, but it doesn't impact survival or reproduction, so there it remains. Of course it used to have a function, but now that it's in the DNA and benign, there's no getting rid of it.

I think a big part of the problem is the normal time lag between developments within the scientific community and when something becomes fodder for the general media. People seem to think that because something hasn't made the 5 o'clock news, it isn't happening--and that when it does hit mainstream, it's new. How many years had experiments and reearch into cloning been going on quietely before Dolly was plastered on our screens? Certainly didn't happen overnight.

For an interesting perspective, and some good reading, check out Darwin's Radio by Greg Bear. It's a work of fiction, and deals with concepts on evolution and DNA that are not new, but interesting.

 

[pophead]

Homo Erectus



Homo Habilis



Homo Neandertal (Yes Neandertal, not Neanderthal )



Homo Sapiens



Gorilla



Baboon



Chimp

The other Homo skulls look far more like our skulls than the other apes. But are obviously not ours. Not any 'Human'.

The most telling factor is the size of the brain caveties as well as the shapes the brains had to have been.

hey y'all. many of the bone structures and skulls that have been found are either a human with a disease, or just a part of another animal(like a pigs tooth! :laugh: ) who's to say the others are proof of evolution? there are modern races whose skull structure are different from each other. so please please don't use that argument. it's really quite lame.

 

[pophead]

I agree with you completely on everything you said, nursie. It's one of the wonderous things about science that we discover more and more about who we are and who we once were and just how far we've come. It also helps us realize the many relationships we have with other organisms, as well as understanding things about these creatures we live with on Earth, and the incredible adaptations that have allowed them to survive. I always wonder why we humans couldn't evolve some of those cool traits that other animals have...I envy animals : I think it'd be cool to have fangs, but then you'd have to find a good use for them. Probably could use them in a situation where someone was trying to attack you in a parking lot, then turn around and latch on to'em! Gotta admit they'd be a bit freaked out by someone with sharp teeth trying to bite them.

sorry guys(or gals). but what you are talking about is theistic evolution. when God makes evolution happen, or helps it at least.
the problem with this is that it doesn't fix the problem, it just takes all the problems of both sides.