The Breakthrough Darwinists Missed: “Junk” DNA Isn’t Junk
Intelligent design predicted that non-coding or “junk” DNA would have function.
For decades proponents of neo-Darwinian evolution have cited the existence of non-coding or “junk” DNA as evidence against intelligent design (ID), the scientific theory that that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
Researchers who had a Darwinian mindset saw the non-coding DNA as mere detritus leftover from our evolutionary past. Scientists with an ID perspective thought it more likely that the “junk” DNA served some purpose worth exploring.
New discoveries vindicate the intelligent design theorists — and suggest evolutionary biologists may have lost precious time because of their assumptions about the origins of DNA.
From Casey Luskin at Evolution News & Views:
The latest issues of the journals Nature and Heredity contain multiple articles reporting function for non-coding DNA. The themes are consistent: types of DNA once thought to be junk now turn out to have function.
A “News & Views” piece in Nature, “Coding in non-coding RNAs,” states: “The discovery of peptides encoded by what were thought to be non-coding — or ‘junk’ — regions of precursors to microRNA sequences reveals a new layer of gene regulation. These sequences may not be junk, after all.” It then describes a new study just published in Nature which finds that precursors of microRNAs can in fact encode proteins. The news article tells a familiar story: Evolutionary biologist meets new type of DNA. Evolutionary biologist doesn’t know what DNA does. Evolutionary biologists assumes DNA is junk and ignores it. Molecular biologist comes along, doesn’t think about evolution, and finds out DNA isn’t junk and does something important.