We may not know what it is, but we’re sure it’s junk.
Link: www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/65098/title/Genome_may_be_mostly_junk_after_all
I’m sure glad that researcher is not in charge of the genome. The comments are more insightful than the headline.
Since research should be accurately reported, I hope the conclusions were reported correctly.
A scientist shouldn’t assume that something is non-functioning or unimportant just because he doesn’t know what its function is. Still, the history of science includes lots of similar statements about things with no known function. Functions are discovered later, when we get smarter. Then we get the “duh” factor…
Hi Peter,
Yeah, interesting conclusion. It’s probably a good conclusion to suppose that preserved DNA sequences are important. However, I don’t think that concluding that the rest is garbage or nonsense is appropriate. Sure there is a common design among mammals, however, I suspect the common sequences are the framework upon which the significant differences are built. Hence the need for all the other DNA. It’s just my humble opinion, but I am continually amazed at the complexity of creation all around us.
Jim Sproul