How the Evolutionist Struck Out on Junk DNA — Part 2

By -
Last month, we examined the "junk" DNA concept in Part 1, and we're fortunate to have the second exciting episode. Darwinists claimed that the little bit of DNA they studied has a great deal of "junk" leftover from our assumed evolutionary past, and creationists claimed that there is no junk, what is there exists for a purpose. 
Evolutionists striking out over "junk" DNA, and fighting each other.
Assembled and modified from components at Clker clipart
Darwin's disciples have a high level of unscientific hauteur, dismissing what they do not understand. The uninformed proselytizers of evolutionism will continue to ignore scientific facts and browbeat those who disagree with them — especially those who know more about science and reason than they do.

What's that cacophony in the science lecture hall? Big fight going on. To declare that DNA does have a purpose is anathema to many fundamentalist evolutionists. If you take out your Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Ring™, you'll see that having a purpose (and not being junk) gets mighty close to implying a Creator, and the faithful don't cotton to that notion. The faithful keep swinging and missing on matters of scientific fact, and secular scientists who are admitting that the "junk" DNA concept is fundamentally flawed are being badgered by jackbooted evo-fascists in their own ranks! Guess one side figures the other side ain't riding for the Darwin brand.

Who will prevail in the scientific establishments, those who want to find answers, or those who want to protect their atheopathic dogmas? Meanwhile, creationary scientists are being proved right yet again. 
For three decades, they overconfidently declared that the messiness of “junk DNA” confirms how nature exercises creative agency over organisms through evolutionary tinkering. These supposedly useless non-coding bits of genetic sequence were flaunted as leftovers of the evolutionary process. Now we’ll see how the true facts about DNA are like a fastball blowing by evolutionists and exposing their overblown claim as a blundering swing-and-a-miss.
To have a ball reading this extremely interesting article, click on "Major Evolutionary Blunders: Evolutionists Strike Out with Imaginary Junk DNA, Part 2".


Popular posts from this blog

Evolution and the New Atheo-Fascism

By -
Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen A large difficulty in researching and writing this article is that of definitions. It is important to have precise definitions when people can understand words and concepts in different ways 1 , and this article involves words with various meanings and connotations. There has been a noticeable increase in vitriol from the so-called "new" atheists (often followers of Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, Hitchens, Shermer, Nye, Krauss and others) and from evolutionists toward Christians and creationists. (I am making distinctions here because not all evolutionists are atheists, and not all Christians are creationists.) Some of us speculate that adherents of the religion of atheism 2 ,which has evolution as one of its cornerstones, feel threatened because evolution's flaws are exposed by Intelligent Design and creation science. This battle is not simply intellectual, but also spiritual. From a biblical Christian perspective, atheists realize that God e
Read more

Discerning Fake Science

By -
Image
Unfortunately, I have to keep gnawing on this bone: scientists are people, too. They make mistakes and have biases. As such, they are not the impartial arbiters of truth and science that many people believe. Many want to do science, others manipulate data for their own agendas. Since nobody is a blank slate and everyone has some kind of bias, it follows that nobody is completely impartial. Try to present creation science materials to atheists and other evolutionists, they often cry, "But that's biased! Those liars for Jesus are trying to convince us of their views!" Brilliant, Sherlock! Doesn't everyone want to present an argument to convince others of their point of view? Also, the ad hominem  is entirely irrational — not only from it being a logical fallacy, but also because biblical creationists serve a holy God who requires righteousness and hates lying. To say that we are lying to get others to believe in God is utterly vacuous. As mentioned several times before,
Read more

Misotheists Dehumanizing Christians and Creationists

By -
Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Making fun of an institution through satire and parody can be found throughout millennia to illustrate perceived absurdities of belief systems. These are used for various targets, but the most common seem to be political or religious.  C. Richard Dawkins ridiculing Ray Comfort, image credits: Flickr / David Shankbone ( public domain ), modified with FotoSketcher So why attack individuals instead of ideas ? It seems like practically everyone does it. Just ask the uncool kids in school. This is far beyond satire or persuasion . A quote commonly (but probably erroneously) attributed to Socrates is, "When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser". This child sees a useful principle in that statement. Although it is common to encounter proponents of atheistic naturalism ridiculing biblical creationists in rallies, books, videos, and so on, it is greatly intensified on social(ist) media. With the option of anonymity, attacks increase with
Read more