Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Church in Ezekiel’s shoes 20/06/2026
- A rose by any other name is still a rose⦠14/06/2026
- Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6 09/06/2026
- Ideology as brain surgery 06/06/2026
- What turns Evangelicals Catholic? 03/06/2026
Recent Comments
- Jon Garvey on Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6
- Jon Garvey on Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6
- Peter Hickman on Some brief new thoughts on Genesis 6
- Jon Garvey on Speech suppression more contagious than COVID – and certainly deadlier
- Ben on Speech suppression more contagious than COVID – and certainly deadlier
Post Archive
Daily Archives: 20/08/2013
More dissenters
If you look at the way the Wikipedia article on “Noncoding DNA” has settled after much to-ing and fro-ing after the ENCODE papers were published, you’ll see that the final “consensus” is that ENCODE’s figure of 80%+ function for DNA means little, since mere transcription is a poor indicator of function. Naughty ENCODE was careless in playing into the Creationists’ hands. Uncommon Descent has just pointed to a paper by Mattick and Dinger who clearly belong to that increasing “lunatic fringe” of people with excellent credentials who cast doubt on that wisdom.
Posted in Creation, Science, Theology
2 Comments