‘Junk DNA’

A good number of proteomic researchers believe there are millions of protein isoforms. A protein isoform is a slight variation of a basic protein. I’m not averse to thinking there are only a limited number of “genes” that govern a basic number of limited protein classes, but that there are millions or billions of protein isoforms. Consider something like the DSCAM gene which has 38,016 alternative splices and presumably 38,016 isoforms. And how about the Dystrophin gene that consist of 2.5 million base pairs and codes for a protein with 3,500 amino acids? There are only a few isoforms so far identified, but with a gene that gigantic, one might guess there is much to discover about the Dystrophin gene. Read More ›

In eukaryotic organisms and especially humans, large amounts of the DNA are transcribed into RNAs that never end up getting translated into proteins. This has led some to argue human DNA is mostly junk. I speculate otherwise. The supposed junk DNA that transcribes to supposed junk RNA is not junk at all. I recently discovered that RNA is an excellent chemical basis for molecular level sensing, logic, computation and communication. Because of these facts I speculate RNAs are important in navigation, organization, computation and processing of information in the eukaryotic cell. I contrast my view with that Darwinist Steve Matheson who debated Stephen Meyer regarding claims in Meyer’s book, Signature in the Cell. Matheson had a dismissive view of DNAs Read More ›

Dan Graur and Larry Moran argue that most of the human genome of 3.2 giga base pairs is junk. I will appeal to engineering intuition and say these guys are awfully premature in their pronouncements since their estimates would imply that a mere 80 megabytes would be enough specify not only an adult human but all the developmental forms that have to be implemented along the way from conception to adulthood. Where did I get the 80 megabyte number? The human genome is about 3.2 giga base pairs. Evolutionnews reports Graur is arguing 5% to 15% of the human genome is functional. For simplicity I’ll suggest the mid range figure from Graur as 10%. That means then 3.2 billion * Read More ›

We’re honored to have Piotr as part of the UD discussions. Though I most certainly disagree with his views about biological evolution, I salute his devotion to the important discipline of linguistics. I would like to acknowledge and promote his blog http://langevo.blogspot.com/. One of my current research interests is in the linguistics of DNA and biological systems in general. There is an ongoing and public dispute over the question of junk DNA in humans. If DNA is shown to be mostly functional in humans, it would suggest most DNA follows some sort of language. In fact, ID proponents are sympathetic to the idea that there are multiple overlapping languages in DNA. If there are multiple languages in DNA, then it Read More ›

Strictly speaking gene guns are inessential for living organisms, but does being inessential for life make this tool of genetic engineering non-functional? If there are tools for innovation and exploration, they might not be essential, but does that mean they are non-functional? Of course not! In like manner transposons and some forms of polyploidy might not strictly speaking be essential, but they might be important for evolutionary innovations and may useful for exploring and innovating. As James Shapiro suggested, the statistics suggest living organisms have some capability for natural genetic engineering, and if they are natural genetic engineers, tools like transposons and some forms of polyploidy may be functional because they are used as part of the process of natural Read More ›