Junk DNA - The Evolutionist's Hope

Evolutionists Hope You Don't Know Chemistry: The Problem of Control - http://www.icr.org/article/45 .

Revealing Purpose in "Junk" DNA - http://www.icr.org/article/3396 .

DNA: A Stew-pendous Creation - http://www.icr.org/article/3137 .

Origin of Life: The Fox Thermal Model of the Origin of Life - http://www.icr.org/article/79 .

Can the Small Changes We See Add Up to the Big Changes Needed for Evolution? - http://www.icr.org/article/538 .

Creation and its Critics: Answers to Common Questions and Criticisms on the Creation Movement - http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_caic .

Quotes by Evolutionary Scientists Against Evolution - http://www.warneveryone.com/evolution_scientists_quotes.htm

Live broadcasting with instant message - http://www.justin.tv/warneveryone

KJV1611 Bible - http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=authorizedversion&search=Search

The Institute for Creation Research equips believers with evidences of the Bible's accuracy and authority through scientific research, educational programs, and media presentations, all conducted within a thoroughly biblical framework.
info@icr.org
www.icr.org

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• crxxxev
• DNA
• RNA
• amino-acids
• proteins
• creation
• evolution
• Dinosaur
• whales
• stars
• moon
• earth
• comets

[winterstellar]

Haha.."evolutionists"? Do you mean *scientists*? Everybody knows that everybody in science are "evolutionists", since evolution is both proven, observed and is being used in practice. So it's a bit pointless to use that term..you should use for instance *biologists*, *zoologists*, *physicists*, *palaentologists* or whatever, depending on who you're describing. Cheers!

[Gorteenminogue]

"Creation Biology"? Spot the oxymoron. 14 minutes of my life wasted listening to this crap.

[lkrnpk]

God- no, aliens as creators MAYBE.

[csadler]

What lying assholes.

[odinata]

@circusOFprecision

Why can't you provide any science to back your assertion that foxes and wolves are not related?

[mecher3k]

@circusOFprecision

So you can't counter that example. Not surprising.

[circusOFprecision]

@mecher3k

Haha! Some if it may be "extra", and the genetic expression of an organism may never use it. But if you would actually delve into the literature, you would see that much of the genome is translated into RNAs. They are just now starting to figure out what those RNAs do. Alot of it has to to do with regulating gene expression. So no, it's not junk. Also, study bacteria and how they shuffle their genomes and incorporate new sequences through lateral gene transfer. You thought wrong.

[mecher3k]

@circusOFprecision

Or tests have been done to show it's junk.

Explain how removing the junk DNA from a group of mice and have them be perfectly fine is not evidence of junk DNA being useless?

Hmmm? What's that you're just a piece of retarded shit creationist? Thought so.

[circusOFprecision]

@mecher3k

So you think people that apply critical thinking skills and skepticism to scientific problems should go kill themselves? Oh, that's right, you are just standing up for your pseudo-scientific religion.

[circusOFprecision]

@winterstellar

So things change = the answer to all questions. Wow, that's incredible. I did not realize that all of my skepticism, my critical thinking, and my need for evidence were all in vein. I'm glad that science has been replaced with evolution and that scientists have been replaced with evolutionists. After all, if we are going to turn this into a battle between pseudo-scientific dogma and reality, we might as well preserve the pseudo-science since it has the term science in it.