Junk DNA, Part 1 of 2 · Dr. Charles Jackson

Share it with your friends Like

Thanks! Share it with your friends!


As a young college professor, Dr. J. had to walk a tight rope because of his objections to evolution theory, and was eventually fired because he didn’t agree that DNA had “junk”.

This idea about “junk DNA” comes from a long history
of misdirected thinking, a history of wildly rampant egos
and arrogance that goes back to the 1920’s, when
evolutionists falsely claimed that so-called vestigial organs (appendix, tonsils, tailbone) were proof of evolution. Having unknown functions, these organs
were said to be useless “leftovers” from the days when
we were fish and rats and worms, and had all these
different organs that natural selection hasn’t weeded out
of us yet. This myth reflected an attitude: “Since we’re so smart,
and we can’t figure out what it does, it must not have any function
or be doing anything.” It was arguing
from ignorance, providing an ignorant hypothesis to an
Unanswered Question. Evolution thrives in the gray
areas and the uncertainties; it is cast into the darkness,
and then said to answer the questions. The amazing part
is that after the truth is found, which rejects the
hypothesis, they continue in their erroneous thinking.
Vestigial organs are still in the textbooks, even though
now they are scientifically indefensible.
The same faulty logic used for vestigial organs came
into play in the 1970’s to explain why only 2% of the human genome had a known function. Eureka! Evidence for evolution: vestigial DNA, or ‘Junk’, left
over from a trial and error genetic system.

The true genetic story began to unfold in the year 2000,
when we first got a hint that the junk DNA had a
purpose, regarding the function of the double X
chromosomes in females. It was discovered that
there was a DNA sequence that was controlling the entire operation, telling which genes to shut down, which to power up and which genes to pump out extra proteins.
And it was all being coordinated by DNA sequences that
weren’t making proteins; they were in the junk region.

It turns out that the junk genes were not making proteins,
but telling all the other genes when to do it. They were
the main circuit board for the entire operation.

By the year 2006, it was public knowledge that junk
DNA was probably not junk. Quote
Time, 10/9/06: ” The non-coding region of the genome, . . is crucial.” It’s a
fantastically complex, crisscrossing network of gene
communications that we have only scratched the surface
on. Many genes overlap one another and share stretches
of molecular code. A gene that controls the production of a protein coded gene was often found on different chromosomes.

Then it was announced in 2007 that the
entire genome (including Junk regions) gets transcribed,
and that both DNA strands are translated. “There is an
interleaved structure of overlapping segments with typically 5, 7,
or 9 or more transcripts coming from one
gene.” The information coding system is so complex, it
means the file management system is way beyond
anything we understand.

The last nail in Darwin’s coffin came in the Sept. 6, 2012 issue of the NY Times (reported in this newsletter,Vol. 77) as follows: “At least 4 million gene switches
turn out to play critical roles in controlling how cells, organs and other tissues behave.” There are master control genes that don’t produce any proteins, but stimulate other genes that produce proteins. Dr. John Sanford, the brilliant geneticist and a born again creationist, says that codes are overlaying within codes
and nested within other codes, and are read in both
directions. What an awesome Creator!

  • Rating:
  • Views:1,950 views
  • Categories: DNA