Re: intelligent design

From: Stein A. Strømme (stromme@mi.uib.no)
Date: Wed Jul 05 2000 - 11:20:16 EDT

Next message: Wendee Holtcamp: "re: duplicated genes/was intelligent design"

Previous message: Wendee Holtcamp: "Re: intelligent design"
In reply to: Wendee Holtcamp: "Re: intelligent design"
Next in thread: Doug Hayworth: "Junk DNA"
Next in thread: Bryan R. Cross: "Re: intelligent design"
Next in thread: Dawsonzhu@aol.com: "Re: intelligent design"
Reply: Doug Hayworth: "Junk DNA"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[Wendee Holtcamp]

| (2) On a mechanistic level, there is a huge deal of genetic code that
| is not used by organisms but is nonethless in their DNA. It is called
| Junk DNA (I'm not sure if this is the official scientific term but it
| was called this in one scientific documentary I saw).

I asked a similar question the other day, but no answers yet so I'll
repeat it here: How can it be known that this DNA "is not used by
organisms"? Is current understanding of genetics really that good?

Stein

-- 
Stein Arild Strømme <mailto:stromme@mi.uib.no>  telefon +47 55584825
Universitetet i Bergen, Matematisk insitutt       mobil +47 95801887
Johs Brunsg 12, N--5008 Bergen                  telefax +47 55589672

Next message: Wendee Holtcamp: "re: duplicated genes/was intelligent design"
Previous message: Wendee Holtcamp: "Re: intelligent design"
In reply to: Wendee Holtcamp: "Re: intelligent design"
Next in thread: Doug Hayworth: "Junk DNA"
Next in thread: Bryan R. Cross: "Re: intelligent design"
Next in thread: Dawsonzhu@aol.com: "Re: intelligent design"
Reply: Doug Hayworth: "Junk DNA"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 05 2000 - 11:20:27 EDT