The difference between Man and Chimp is in the Junk DNA neodarwinists ignored


According to Neo-Darwinism, natural selection only acts on coding DNA, which is the DNA that codes for proteins. Noncoding DNA, on the other hand, is thought to be mostly junk DNA that does not have any function. Therefore, it was thought that natural selection could not act on noncoding DNA.

Evolutionists compared the coding of exonic DNA (2% of the genome) between chimps and man to say we are 98% similar. However it was only 98% similar in 2%. Their NeoDarwinian thinking ignored the 98% Junk DNA.

This Junk DNA  theory is by far the greatest mistake made by neo darwinists.

This is but one article showing why.

"Human and Chimp Brains Differ in Non-Coding Regulatory DNA":

The human brain is about three times as big as the brain of our closest living relative, the chimpanzee. This difference in brain size is thought to be due to a number of factors, including the number of neurons in the brain, the number of connections between neurons, and the complexity of the brain's circuitry.

One of the key differences between the human and chimpanzee brain is in the way that genes are regulated. Non-coding regulatory DNA (ncRNA) plays an important role in gene regulation, and there are a number of differences in the ncRNA between humans and chimpanzees. These differences are thought to be responsible for some of the key differences in brain development and function between the two species. Non-coding regulatory DNA (ncRNA) is a type of DNA that does not code for proteins. However, it plays an important role in gene regulation by controlling when and where genes are turned on and off. ncRNA can be either transcribed into RNA molecules or directly interact with DNA to regulate gene expression.

There are many different types of ncRNA, including microRNAs, long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs), and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs). MicroRNAs are the most abundant type of ncRNA and are thought to be involved in a wide range of biological processes, including cell differentiation, development, and aging. lncRNAs are longer than microRNAs and are thought to play a role in gene regulation, RNA splicing, and translation. siRNAs are small RNA molecules that bind to complementary sequences of mRNA and interfere with their translation into proteins.

There are a number of differences in the ncRNA between humans and chimpanzees. One study found that humans have more ncRNA than chimpanzees, and that these ncRNA are more likely to be transcribed into RNA molecules. This suggests that ncRNA may play a more important role in gene regulation in humans than in chimpanzees outside of NeoDarwinism.

Another study found that the sequences of some ncRNA are different between humans and chimpanzees. This suggests that these ncRNA may have different functions in the two species. For example, one study found that a lncRNA called HAR1 is longer in chimpanzees than in humans. This lncRNA is thought to be involved in the development of the brain, and its longer length in chimpanzees may contribute to the larger size of the chimpanzee brain.

The differences in ncRNA between humans and chimpanzees are thought to be one of the factors that contribute to the larger size and complexity of the human brain. ncRNA can regulate the expression of genes involved in brain development, and the changes in ncRNA between humans and chimpanzees may have led to changes in the expression of these genes. This, in turn, may have contributed to the evolution of the larger and more complex human brain without Darwin.

The differences in ncRNA between humans and chimpanzees provide insights into the genetic basis of human brain evolution outside of neodarwinism. ncRNA plays an important role in gene regulation, and the changes in ncRNA between the two species are thought to be one of the factors that contribute to the larger size and complexity of the human brain. Further research on the role of ncRNA in human brain evolution is likely to shed light on the genetic basis of our unique cognitive abilities.

In addition to the above, here are some other key points to mentioned in the article:

  • The study of non-coding regulatory DNA is a relatively new field, and there is still much that we do not know about its role in human brain evolution.

  • However, the findings of this study suggest that ncRNA may play a more important role in human brain evolution than previously thought.

  • Further research on the role of ncRNA in human brain evolution is likely to be a fruitful area of study.

  • Noncoding DNA is not NeoDarwinian Junk DNA.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the Sequence: The Epigenetic "Fingers" That Play the DNA Keyboard

Image
Imagine the keyboard itself is not a standard piano keyboard, but a modular synthesizer, capable of producing an almost infinite array of sounds. The DNA sequence, then, represents the fundamental building blocks of this synthesizer, the raw materials from which all sounds are generated. Epigenetics, our "fingers," manipulates these building blocks, adjusting parameters like volume, timbre, and rhythm, transforming the raw potential of the DNA sequence into a symphony of cellular functions. We can further refine the "fingers" analogy. Consider that each finger represents a distinct epigenetic mechanism: DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA.  DNA methylation, for instance, might be the "index finger," capable of precisely silencing specific genes, like muting individual keys on the synthesizer. Histone modifications, the "middle finger," could represent the ability to adjust the accessibility of the DN...
Read more

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?

Image
As nature reveals the strength of epigenetics and the weakness of Neo-Darwinism, biologists are “running” away from the long-standing accepted theory. In The Federalist , April 2019, Benjamin Dierker reviews “Why one-third of biologists now question Darwinism”: "Current estimates are that approximately one-third of professional academic biologists who do not believe in intelligent design find Darwin’s Theory inadequate to describe all of the complexity in biology.” Dierker continues, “The important note is that these are not ideologues or religious zealots, nor do they propose a god or biblical solution.  Rather, they find problems in the lack of explanatory power of Darwin’s theory in light of modern understanding of mutation, variation, DNA sequencing and more. These expressions of doubt do not reject naturalism or evolution per se, but the rigor of the Neo-Darwinian model for explaining the development of life.” For 40 years, scientists calculated natural se...
Read more

Rewriting the Rules: Epigenomic Mutation Bias Challenges Randomness in Evolution

Image
This research challenges the long-held dogma that mutations occur randomly, irrespective of their consequences, by demonstrating a clear, epigenome-mediated mutation bias in Arabidopsis thaliana . The study meticulously unveils how mutation rates are not uniform across the genome but are significantly reduced in functionally constrained regions, particularly within gene bodies and essential genes. This discovery fundamentally alters our understanding of evolutionary processes, suggesting that mutation is not a purely directionless force. "Mutation bias reflects natural selection in Arabidopsis thaliana" This opening statement encapsulates the core finding: mutation rates are not random but reflect epigenetic pressures. The authors demonstrate that mutations are less frequent in crucial genomic regions, directly contradicting the prevailing theory of random mutation. This observation suggests an active mechanism that minimizes deleterious mutations in essentia...
Read more