Comments on: Non-functional DNA: quantity. http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/non-functional-dna-quantity/ Sun, 05 Feb 2012 06:46:45 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: TR Gregory http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/non-functional-dna-quantity/comment-page-1/#comment-693 TR Gregory Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:39:00 +0000 http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/non-functional-dna-quantity/#comment-693 <i>I am curious about your comment about an onion needing so much more "junk" DNA in a structural role. </i><br/><br/>I do not claim that the onion requires 5x more DNA. I am noting that if someone else wishes to claim that all non-coding DNA is essential, then they would have to account for why an onion needs so much more of it. This is just one example -- it's nothing special or negative about onions. I am curious about your comment about an onion needing so much more “junk” DNA in a structural role.

I do not claim that the onion requires 5x more DNA. I am noting that if someone else wishes to claim that all non-coding DNA is essential, then they would have to account for why an onion needs so much more of it. This is just one example — it’s nothing special or negative about onions.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/non-functional-dna-quantity/comment-page-1/#comment-689 Anonymous Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:14:00 +0000 http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/non-functional-dna-quantity/#comment-689 I am curious about your comment about an onion needing so much more "junk" DNA in a structural role. Might it be simpler, that the onion is just an onion and happens to have this large portion of "junk". I may also be that this large portion of "junk" was part of a successful genome. There may be many other possible ways the onion genome might be successful (with less or more junk), this is just the one that arose. I am curious about your comment about an onion needing so much more “junk” DNA in a structural role. Might it be simpler, that the onion is just an onion and happens to have this large portion of “junk”. I may also be that this large portion of “junk” was part of a successful genome. There may be many other possible ways the onion genome might be successful (with less or more junk), this is just the one that arose.

]]> By: Chris Harrison http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/non-functional-dna-quantity/comment-page-1/#comment-688 Chris Harrison Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:43:00 +0000 http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/non-functional-dna-quantity/#comment-688 Hey wait, are you telling me that the anti-evolutionists who claim Darwinism made all biologists declare all non-genic DNA to be junk are historically illiterate morons?<br/><br/>oh. <br/><br/>right. Hey wait, are you telling me that the anti-evolutionists who claim Darwinism made all biologists declare all non-genic DNA to be junk are historically illiterate morons?

oh.

right.

]]>