A scientific Critique of the Function of Non-Coding DNA Part 1

[ajlifesgood]

this is really helping me in school thank you

[spark300c]

love your vids keep it up ;D

[kut77less]

//love your vids keep it up ;D//

thanks for all the comments you do on my vids

[RyuDarragh]

Ah, that makes more sense :) You can reduce the number of junk posts (including mine) by saying that in the top of the description. Unless readers have info about the relavence of your video or the information, there's no need to comment here.

[RyuDarragh]

I mean the paper in your description. It sounds like an oblique "irreducible Complexity" argument and those are looking at the situation from the wrong end of the microscope at the wrong end of the argument.

[kut77less]

"an oblique "irreducible Complexity" "

I never intentioned it to be like that. I was replying to some person who said my information was outdated. In the description I corrected him that he was wrong

[RyuDarragh]

The argument from the paper is old hat and youre use of it disingenuous at best. All it proves is a still great gap in the understanding of DNA that is only now being understood. Even Crick said there would always be surprises locked away in the genome.. especially when we thought we had all the answers. Look up the amount of DNA in each organism in terms of bp. Some single cell organisms have more DNA then we do. As long as it does not kill the organism, it can presist.

[kut77less]

That was my point the this video series. Evolutionist always say that something is poor design that that we don't need something. This is not true and it is proven wrong as more research is appalled to the subject. so far non-coding DNA has function.

[LotusGreenX]

"so far non-coding DNA has function."

Well the've eliminated a lot non-coding DNA in mice and it did not effect htem. ERV's also can have function within it, but the virus itself has no function. It's not enough to cherry pick your evidence to refute the scientific community.

[kut77less]

What paper are you talking about is the one I used in my video. It seems what you are saying is supporting my conclusion

[RyuDarragh]

"Junk DNA" has fallen into disfavor as the earlier researchers had no knowledge of higher level coding. There are many, many sequences called "Junk DNA" that code for essential functions, but simply don't get expressed like protein coding DNA. Even the "duplicates" once thought to soleley be junk in every case have been reexamined as they now appear to be expression level controls. And we have seen this happen in life. Where do you think several human diseases come from? Duplicated DNA.

[CapnOrdinary]

On the slide "Straw Gods" (I like that title, btw) you claim that "[God] can create in any way He wants". I have a couple of questions re. that:

1) can you provide a definition of god that would allow us to make predictions about design philosophies? Testable predictions would be nice...

2) How do you know that your original sentence is true? Where did you get that information?

Looking forward to your reply.

[kut77less]

"can you provide a definition of god that would allow us to make predictions about design philosophies? Testable predictions would be nice..."

It will take me forever to define god but I can tell you that god works on a specific prophetic calendar and we can use that to make future predictions of future events. The bible Says that russia will attack isreal. We will see if this is actually true

"How do you know that your original sentence is true? Where did you get that information?"

Con..

[gorilla199uncensored]

Nice song is that public domain?

[kut77less]

"Nice song is that public domain? "

Nice red hearing

[gorilla199uncensored]

"Nice red hearing "

Nice pay out for breach of copyright!

How much money do you think they would charge for using it on the net for a video?

You make like stealing, they wont you like stealing their property tho!

[kut77less]

Becuase god is not confined by your mind. You can not say that god doesnt due something for some reason and then claim it is wrong and bad. god says the heart is wicked it is best not to put a cage on what god can do

[CapnOrdinary]

You are making some very bold assertions here. I will ask you again: How do you know this? What is the source of your information?

[kut77less]

" What is the source of your information?"

what specif information are you asking for

[CapnOrdinary]

You are attributing an awful lot of things and abilities to this entity you call "god" (which you haven't defined). So what I'm asking is: How do you know what this entity is (if you do), and that it possesses these traits? What is the source of your information?

[kut77less]

"nd that it possesses these traits? What is the source of your information? "

It is called the bible and it says god created everything. You my friend are putting limits on god

[CapnOrdinary]

The bible is the source of all your information about this "god" entity? Okay. What's this "bible", then, and how do you know it's true?

[kut77less]

"is "bible", then, and how do you know it's true? "

This is easy. The bible says something and if the bible is "true" then what the bible says would be verified. This is shown through bible prophecy

[CapnOrdinary]

"The bible says something and if the bible is "true" then what the bible says would be verified. This is shown through bible prophecy"

I'm sorry, I didn't catch that. The bible talks, and then, IF the bible is correct, we know that it's correct? Or?

And what's this "prophecy"?

[kut77less]

"The bible talks, and then, IF the bible is corr"

No it is correct because the things that it predicted came to pass

/watch?v=I5zFclLOstE

For an example

[CapnOrdinary]

Okay, in order for a prediction to be usable, it must be: Verified, prescient, accurate, non-trivial, and precise. I'm sorry, but those in the video you linked fail at fulfilling those demands. Also, his misuse of the scientific method is apalling.

But please, if you have a bible prediction that fulfills the criteria, don't hesitate to bring it. But please, write it out, video links are unnecessarily time consuming.

[kut77less]

"Verified, prescient, accurate, non-trivial, and precise"

You make a baseless claim that has no value. you just simply dismiss what I have shown you

An atheist once said " what asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence"

I think you should follow his advice

[CapnOrdinary]

I dismiss it because it does not constitute a prediction, unless it fulfills all of the above. It is not impressive to write down a prediction of things after they take place, and there was no evidence supplied in the video you linked that any of those "predictions" were written down earlier. Hence, not verified.

Hey, you're free to believe it all you want. It isn't going to convince me unless you can supply evidence to fulfill all 5 of those criteria.

[kut77less]

"to write down a prediction of things after they take place"

It was written before.....

[CapnOrdinary]

Possibly. However, no evidence was presented (or has, to my knowledge, ever been presented) to support that conclusion.

[kut77less]

I am sorry but I do not understand what you are trying to say. Are you asking for evidence of the bible being older then the creation of Isreal?

[CapnOrdinary]

No, I'm well aware that the bible is older than the current state of Israel. But when exactly the books of the old testament were written is, afaik, a matter of some contention. I could write a long dissertation on my issues with these prophecies, but I'm sure if you look on any history website that isn't apologetic in nature, you can find it yourself.

[Tacos25n28]

miss defining and quote mining is what makes this video completely idiotic.

[kut77less]

I quote very few people here can you please point to were I do a quote mine

[Tacos25n28]

Lack of H1 shortenst the lifespan of the organism... That is not true.

In the multicelled filamentous ascomycete Ascolobus immersus, the single copy gene for histone H1 can be silenced by methylation in the process known as methylation-induced premeiotically (MIP). This is what shortens the lifespan. If the H1 is non existant or missing then this does not apply.

Read BioEssays 22:873-877, 2000. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc

This is one of many... Its more misinformation then quote mining.

[kut77less]

science is its constantly changing nature. Half the stuff I was taught and taught myself years ago seems to be turning out to be complete rot, but then that is one of the things that makes life - and particularly science - such an interesting undertaking. Im glad that I learned long ago not to accept whatever the current science is with too much faith. and can you provide a link to that so I can fix it thanks

[Tacos25n28]

it is hard to believe you are such a heavy creationist christian but still work on science so much... Your using 10 year old or older info and you did some reading between the lines or fast read some of the info that you put on here... judging from your channel it seemed you tried to weave this into your view of teaching cration in universities and schools...

[kut77less]

"it is hard to believe you are such a heavy creationist christian"

Of course No creationist get the credibility of studying science

"Your using 10 year old or older info "

that is my bad but I didn't look in a ten year old text book if that is what you are trying to say

"your view of teaching cration in universities and schools... "

No I am not

[kut77less]

I got a hold of the easy that you reference but it does not say what you are claiming. Is it okay that I post your claim and my response in the more info section

[kut77less]

I got a Hold on your essay that you referred to it and you are the one who is quote mining.

So I will post my response to you in the more info section. Thanks for your concern

[Tacos25n28]

well we are not always 100% correct and if our info is off in some way or we are misunderstanding it then please tell us.

We dont know everything on the subjects but we do have interest in them and we do try to keep up with this and many other interest. But in doing so we dont have a complete knowledge or understanding we should on these issues we comment on from time to time. But we think we do. That is one of the problems with wanting to know so much and having so little time to do that in.

[kut77less]

There is no human dna for a tail because there is no tail on humans ( and yes I know what you are talking about)

tinyurl(dot)com/646ppb

[Impaler1815]

"others work as spaces or grammar."

Genetically a space could be as little as a single base. That's one base of junk DNA per gene, meaning we should be a 0.0001% junk DNA. You still have a long way to go to explain that 95%.

[kut77less]

"Genetically a space could be as little as a single base. That's one base of junk DNA per gene, meaning we should be a 0.0001% junk DNA. You still have a long way to go to explain that 95%."

Dont worry I will. And it is not just spaces and it is not one single base

[StupidCreationists]

"So you agree you can not say what god/gods/aliens/unicorn etc actually did the intelligent designing? "

"Yes I can the god of the Bible designed life "

No thats not agreeing!

So how do tyou prove it was thye god you just conviently believe in?

WOW your bible the one for the religion you believe says so! LOL

SO DOES EVERYONES HOLY BOOK!

So there is no proof its your god! (OH wait would need proof your god even exists first) So double trouble there!

[kut77less]

First Learn how to use proper writing skills. I cannot make out what you are trying to say

The bible makes predictions and fulfills them

[StupidCreationists]

No it does not it get things wrong!

WOW your bible the one for the religion you believe says so! LOL

SO DOES EVERYONES HOLY BOOK!

[kut77less]

Grow up. How about the phrocey that

bigwhammyRocks made a video about that is just one. what about the prediction that Israel will get attacked by Russia (this will happen) all the political rivals are set up. The bible also says that Israel will by a advanced agriculture country(which it is)

[StupidCreationists]

"The bible also says that Israel will by a advanced agriculture country(which it is) "

Not as many.

People will breath air WOW my prophecy!

So hold is the earth?

Why are you embaressed to answer this question? :)

[kut77less]

"So hold is the earth?"

I cant because you question is unclear and I cannot digest what you are trying to say

[bigwhammyRocks]

impaler:"So your answer to junk DNA is simply "God just made it that way". How very scientific (sarcasm). "

your position is logically fallacious...

It's actually an argument from ignorance to call it "junk" just because you are ignorant of what it's purpose is. One day we will probably discover it plays a more vital role that we have not conceived of yet.

[kut77less]

You are right. Just recently there was ENCODE (Encyclopedia Of DNA Elements) project which examined 1% of the genome and guess what they saw that "junk DNA" had more function then thought check out my future videos which I talk about ENCODE result

[Impaler1815]

Junk DNA has been put to the test many times. First, we know what stop and start codons look like so we know whether a sequence codes or not. Second, organisms have had all their junk DNA knocked out in the lab, producing no noticable effects.

Maybe one day you'll find a new type of start and stop codon, or find an actual reason for junk DNA, but until then junk DNA can safely be called junk.

[kut77less]

Well I did say Junk DNA is DNA that does not code for protein and thats why it is called non coding DNA. They are starting to call it non coding because they are finding newer and newer function of this DNA

[kut77less]

"Junk DNA has been put to the test many times."

No it hasent more function is discovered as time [passes

[Impaler1815]

Finding a minor function for some of the junk DNA does not negate the fact that junk DNA would be poor design. Finding more areas that code for RNA, but not proteins, hardly provides a valid reason for God to create such a high percentage of junk DNA.

[kut77less]

NO it is evidence for design not against design many of the regions of DNA are for adaptive purposes, and are not activated except in specific environments where they are needed. DNA ca also revert mutations back to the original coding.

creationist agree that some parts of the genome have been deactivated due to mutation, and no longer play any role in the organism.

This is because of the fall so god didn't "put" junk DNA in the genome it was a result of the fall.

[Impaler1815]

"NO it is evidence for design"

Oh I'd love to see your rationalle behind this. My guess is you'll have little more to say than the old complexity=design arguement.

Even if junk DNA was some kind of genetic backup, which it isn't, it's way overkill to have 20 times our coding bases as backup.

It's more than just "some parts" that are junk. 95% of the genome is junk, that's an awful lot of deactivating mutations.

[kut77less]

"Even if junk DNA was some kind of genetic backup, which it isn't, it's way overkill to have 20 times our coding bases as backup.

It's more than just "some parts" that are junk. 95% of the genome is junk, that's an awful lot of deactivating mutations."

Fist I never said all "junk DNA works as a back up. I said some regions works as a back others work as spaces or grammar.

[StupidCreationists]

"NO it is evidence for design"

So you agree you can not say what god/gods/aliens/unicorn etc actually did the intelligent designing?

[kut77less]

"So you agree you can not say what god/gods/aliens/unicorn etc actually did the intelligent designing? "

Yes I can the god of the Bible designed life

[StupidCreationists]

"meaning we should be a 0.0001% junk DNA. "

Ah no theres long strings of junk DNA.

Do you include the Human DNA for a tail?

whales DNA for a rear flippers?

As DNA Junk?

[kut77less]

What are you talking about

[StupidCreationists]

"There is no human dna for a tail because there is no tail on humans ( and yes I know what you are talking about)

tinyurl(dot)com/646ppb "

DNA mapping proves the DNA is there!

There is DNA for a tail!

Whales have DNA for rear flippers!

Why do they have this DNA?

Why did god give them DNA thats NOT used?

[kut77less]

You just repeated yourself

[StupidCreationists]

"You just repeated yourself "

Yes because you failed to understand (Rather deliverabetly pretend to not understand) as it shoes design is a fantasy!

[kut77less]

I have explained already but you don't listen

Children aren't born with tails. Some have been born with fatty appendages which don't line up with the spine, nor have muscular or bone development.

[kut77less]

So in a pre fall world there would be no useless DNA

[Impaler1815]

So your answer to junk DNA is simply "God just made it that way". How very scientific (sarcasm). Evolution actually explains why junk DNA exists. Junk DNA exists because there is little selective pressure for the sequence or size of junk DNA in more complex organisms. As such junk DNA can mutate and duplicate freely. Where you just claim miracles, we actually find a valid mechanism. Score 1 for evolution!

[Impaler1815]

Eukaryotes don't reproduce every 20 minutes. The time taken to replicate DNA is miniscule compared to the time it takes to build the rest of the cell. Having an extra stretch of junk DNA would matter little to an organism of that complexity.

[kut77less]

"Eukaryotes don't reproduce every 20 minutes."

I never said that

". Having an extra stretch of junk DNA would matter little to an organism of that complexity. "

Actually junk DNA is like grammar so that they can produce different things but the "junk DNA" So you are right a little non coding DNA would not matter but you most remember the majority of our DNA is junk

and we are learning more functions as science devolpes

[Impaler1815]

"I never said that"

I never said you did. I was making the point that for Eukaryotes speed of reproduction is not the most important factor in their survival.

"the majority of our DNA is junk"

Surely you're not suggesting that for evolution to work all junk DNA would have to have appeared all at once? Throughout any point in history I doubt any organism had any more than a short stretch of extra junk DNA more than its competition.

[kut77less]

"Surely you're not suggesting that for evolution to work all junk DNA would have to have appeared all at once? Throughout any point in history I doubt any organism had any more than a short stretch of extra junk DNA more than its competition."

All I said is the majority of DNA is non-coding DNA

[Impaler1815]

Do you even remember the things you write? Considering the large number of unanswered points on your video "Top 5 Myths of Evolution" I'd guess not.

You said small amounts of extra junk DNA wouldn't matter to an organism, but there is a very high percentage of junk DNA in eukaryotes. I said that at no point in history would any organism have more than a small amount of junk DNA more than its compeditors, as such the amount of junk DNA can grow without ever being selected against.

[kut77less]

Did you even watch the video I explained how non coding DNA works plus this is part 1. In part 2 I go more in to the function

[Impaler1815]

You only explained the molecular reasons for junk DNA. You never explained why God would make organisms with so much of it besides "God works in mysterious ways".

[kut77less]

yes but in part two I will say what function non coding DNA does have according to are current knowledge