BYU researchers help toss theory that most DNA is 'junk' through ENCODE Project work

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 5:22 p.m.


    I hope a 19 year old Doctor saves your life some day.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 5:14 p.m.


    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 Harwich, MA
    Oct. 5, 2012 4:29 p.m.

    @a voice of reason....Lives hang in the balance of DNA research and findings.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 1:17 p.m.

    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 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 9:56 a.m.


    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".

  • Dennis Harwich, MA
    Oct. 5, 2012 5:46 a.m.

    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.....

  • Floyd Johnson Broken Arrow, OK
    Oct. 4, 2012 8:23 p.m.

    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.