How the Evolutionist Struck Out on Junk DNA — Part 2

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".