Raise your hand if you remembered the term "nucleosome" from Biology
101. That was the twisted rubber band lecture. I chuckled when the article took
the evolution/creationism turn. I have studied the topic significantly more than
most, and I have the discovered the correct postion on the debate: it
doesn't matter, we should spend our time with other topics of discussion.
DNA research may very well be important but BYU "researchers" that are
19 year old Phys Ed majors don't particularly inspire much confidence in
the results. Are we to assume that every time there's an article
mentioning "BYU Research" we're to believe they're making
reference to kids in class? Just wondering.....
Dennis,Perhaps you welcome prejudice in your life but I do not.If a 10 year old made a mathematical proof, would you discount it
because of their age? In fact, you may not be aware of this but that is a
perfect example. In Mathematics, youth is most commonly the 'prime' of
one's ability to reason. More proofs come out of young mathematicians than
their senior counterparts.You also implied that being a student of a
field doesn't inspire confidence in what students find, provide, argue, and
conclude. I can't imagine too many professors agreeing with you. Mine
taught me a GREAT deal, but I also taught them from time to time.Everyone has their own specialties and unique points of view to contribute-
that's a fundamental of the growth of human intelligence. 10 students all
have interesting ideas and some more accurate than another, but under the
GUIDANCE of their professor they can work more effectively. Personally, I find
educational institutions to be less assuming than professionals. Sometimes the
older you get, the more you make things fit your theory rather than genuinely
looking for answers- which is the entire point of "research".
One reason for the 80% figure is that the ENCODE project used a very expansive
and nontraditional (in evolutionary biology) definition of "function" to
include about just any biochemical activity, not just transcription and protein
coding, which have evolutionary relevance. Biologist PZ Myers has blogged that,
"This isn't just a loose and liberal definition of 'function,
it's an utterly useless one." Not to discount the value of the
research, but some of the conclusions are premature.
@a voice of reason....Lives hang in the balance of DNA research and findings.
Dennis,Maybe you don't know that much about Math, but our lives
hang in the balance just as much from Math as it does Science.Some
of the greatest physicists, chemists, biologists, mathematicians, and doctors
this world has ever seen started having an impact in their fields well before
the age of 19. Some of them before they were even teenagers.It's called the "Ad Hominem" fallacy. No matter how hard you try,
you will never be right when you adhere to it. But then again, I'm in my
20's, what could I possibly know about logic and reason? In fact, you
can't really trust anything I say at all because I like BYU, I'm
young, and I'm not Dennis from Harwich, MA.I can tolerate other
opinions just fine, but when your opinion equates to pure condescension of
others based solely off of prejudicial criteria, then I do not accept your
claims. I don't assume the quality of one's argument before hearing
it. Again, it's Ad Hominem and no matter how hard you try to argue it- you
will never be justified. Prejudice is wrong morally AND logically.
Dennis,I hope a 19 year old Doctor saves your life some day.