A good portion of our genetic code has no apparent purpose ... that is until you account for millions if not billions of mutations that no longer have a phenotype in modern humans.
Would a perfect designer really leave a bunch of bent over nails in the perfect piece of furniture?
2006-10-25 03:04:50 · 15 answers · asked by Brendan G 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Born again: I wasn't sure about your argument until you added the "DUH!". Now I know you're a moron.
2006-10-25 03:25:53 · update #1
Hmmmm ... interesting.
Maybe he's a halfassed builder. He certainly is a halfassed maintainer
2006-10-25 03:10:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
The "good portion of genetic code" that "has no apparent purpose", it may not have an apparent purpose to humans, but then we're not all knowing are we? Think of all the things that humans thought had no purpose and later were found to have purpose. Example - the appendix. Doctors always thought the appendix had no purpose, but now they say it actually plays a part in a persons immune system.
God created humans perfect, but they sinned against him. Since they are no longer perfect the body no longer has the ability to attain or sustain perfect health and thus you have "bent over nails".
2006-10-25 03:13:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see many Christians have answered that the reason for non-coding DNA is that man has sinned. ( A if that makes any sense ). A followup question then is why is so much of this non-coding DNA identical between Chimps, Bonobos and Humans.
Seems like this platform is filled with idiots who do not know the definition of a theory in the context of science. Where do these people go to school. How do you educated in this country thinking a scientific theory is just a guess?
2006-10-25 03:19:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
sir,
Firstly, most scientists don't use the term "junk dna" anymore since they've found that much of that "junk" has very important purposes. For example, many regulatory genes were once known as the "junk dna"!
Furthermore, no-one is denying that mutation and MICRO-evolution happens. Both of those would account for whatever junk there may be. But that doesn't prove MACRO-evolution nor does it disprove that G-d created life.
2006-10-25 04:11:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
God created a perfect man in the beginning. It is through sin that your "junk" DNA came into being. The Bible says that all of creation groans as the result of mans sin. The world we live in , this reality is nothing like God's original plan for mankind.
There will be a time when death and sickness will be no more. I guess the "junk" DNA will have been trashed... along with those that fail to respond to the truths of Gods word.
2006-10-25 03:10:45 · answer #5 · answered by zero 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What might evolutionists say? i think of they might say that, like with many different such simplistic words, the favored technology press (aimed on the whole at laypeople, no longer scientists) has persisted to apply words that quite scientists stopped using some time past. in the event that they ever used them broadly in the 1st place. words which, on an identical time as elementary for newshounds to bear in recommendations, are in actuality deceptive. Like "lacking hyperlink" as an occasion. by the way, he maximum emphatically does no longer say that not one of the stuff is "junk." in simple terms that much less of it is than people concept greater desirable than ten years in the past. And no longer something in that interview comes everywhere on the factor of helping the thought that technology "validates the Bible." in any respect. additionally, vestigial does no longer recommend nonfunctional. It potential "left over." Repurposing vestigial structures is exactly what evolutionary concept predicts. "no longer understanding what all of it does" =/= "God could have made it. In any language.
2016-10-16 09:41:07 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The key here is "apparent purpose". Do you really think science has unlocked all the mysteries of the human genome? To think that with our limited understanding, we can make such broad statements is utterly ridiculous. The fact is, we don't know enough to make arguments such as these. This is the problem with those claiming inter-species evolution. They make broad assumptions based on what they desire, but hardly logical.
2006-10-25 03:08:53 · answer #7 · answered by AT 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Evolution is unproven voodoo science. If it were proven, science would call it the Law of Evolution, but it's still just a theory. And the dictionary says a theory is a guess.
Just because their use is unknown doesn't mean it is useless.
I got an idea... why doesn't science GUESS, I mean, theorize about it? DUH!
Life can't evolve from non-life, thus evolution can't explain how the very first life form came into existence.
2006-10-25 03:18:44 · answer #8 · answered by Born Again Christian 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
And why 80 species of bat, 800 species of tarantula, a mouse that exists only on Cyprus. Maybe he was bored.
2006-10-25 03:07:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The key word in your question is "apparent"
Back to your drawing board
Peace and Blessings,
Salim
2006-10-25 03:07:28 · answer #10 · answered by إمام سليم چشتي 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
99% of species that have existed on this planet no longer exist-I wonder why God bothered to "design" them.
2006-10-25 03:11:07 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋