A debate over evolution is also off topic. Perhaps you’d like to discuss it over at the Super Uncle thread.

It is cool that you have assisted your father. I’m sure you can add to the conversation. We very much like to have diverse viewpoints, especially those which are informed by the experience you have.

Btw, my term “osmosis” was a bit of a mockery (sorry) toward the faith of evolution; but okay, I’ll use the terms you like.

As to DNA being junk, hmmm… not quite…! But then –how about the human eye? It has been deemed impossible to have evolved. Kinda like how it’s impossible for a computer, a watch, or even a mousetrap to evolve into a functioning contraption. So –the human body…?

As to your requirements of me –in being willing to discuss with me– oh, well. (Shrug.) But does it count that my dad actually is a well-known cultural anthropologist with a Ph.D. in it from the University of Hawaii, is also an ecologist, and is also a Bible Translator? I mean, I’ve for years proofread most of his published articles, some of his book chapters, and did type his huge dissertation back in 1985. And of course, I’ve always been one of his “students”, so I must know a little. –Just curious (though true –not very relevant)… but since you mentioned languages and anthro., I thought maybe I should respond to it.

Rachel

Just curious, if you all don’t believe in God, (or do you), or that He exists, and therefore does talk, then what’s your take on DNA? I mean we have trillions of strands in our bodies and each one is more complex than a large city. Doesn’t it take a ton of faith to believe that came about by osmosis[sic]?

I think we would all agree that humans are laughably simple beings compared to a god who must be infinitely more intelligent, skilled, and powerful to have created the universe. So, here is an old question that people seem to prefer to expend as little time as possible contemplating: Where did God come from? A common answer is essentially that God is eternal, and thus has always been there. And then they change the subject. I think all the answers I’ve heard are designed to avoid serious consideration of the question.

If you want to assert that God just suddenly appeared, then that is not nearly good enough for me. There is just not a single shred of evidence for that (and Bible verses don’t count). So, if God didn’t just suddenly appear, he must have developed by some form of osmosis evolution.

If you cannot believe that life on earth could have developed via evolution, how can you possibly believe that an infinitely more intelligent, skilled, and powerful God just came into existence by poof!, or by a form of evolution?

I defer to PZ Myers. I’m not sure where he got his PhD in Biochemistry from but perhaps from the university of Minnesota where he teaches. You can contact him yourself to find out. Here’s what he had to say about junk DNA:

The link you posted is a rant against a proponent of Intelligent Design I am no such beast.

PZ Meyer’s post is dated 23 Jan 2008.

Here’s a link to an article from a respected source dated over a year later, 21 May 2009, showing that new research shows that not all “Junk DNA” is actually junk.

All definitions of “Junk DNA” that I have been able to find in half an hour of googling all indicate that “Junk DNA” is used to categorize DNA for which there is no currently known function.

So again I stand by my assertion, just because scientists don’t yet know what certain areas of DNA do, doesn’t mean they don’t do anything, or are worthless.

Good grief, Timothy, do you require all that in order to believe historians also?

Nope. But those folks who want to tell me what the Bible “says” had better be prepared to back it up with culture, context, linguistics, and history.

Well, come to think of it, if someone wants to tell me about what has “always been true in history” then they’d better have some history and cultural anthropology degrees.

Because we all have opinions and we are entitled to them. But having an opinion without having earned credibility makes that opinion of no greater value than asking the Magic 8 Ball.

Sometimes in our pluralistic society we are quick to honor and respect everyone’s opinions as though they are equally valuable. They aren’t.

I found it amusing during the recent Perry v. Schwarzenegger case that the witness for the Prop 8 supporters, David Blankenhorn, seemed shocked that the attorneys wanted evidence, proof, for his opinions. And when he couldn’t site an actual study or an anthropologist or actual scientist, then his opinion was considered to be worthless.

So you are, of course, welcome to your views. And you can even think to yourself that they are God’s views.

But to convince me that they are what the Bible says, you’ll have to be qualified.

Irrelevant. I defer to PZ Myers. I’m not sure where he got his PhD in Biochemistry from but perhaps from the university of Minnesota where he teaches. You can contact him yourself to find out. Here’s what he had to say about junk DNA:

In the early days when cell biologists were describing satellite DNA and all those other interesting repetitive sequences Arthur Whitely talked about this stuff how he was scratching his head and wondering what it did — there was initially no assumption that it was non-functional, and if Darwinian preconceptions fed into the argument at all, it was to suggest that there must be an underlying utility to such ubiquitous elements of the genome. What led to the conclusion (not assumption) of non-function was observations of its nature and experimental work that showed it was highly variable, and changed and deleted without observable consequences to the organism. It also helped that comparative work showed no discernable pattern to the distribution of the stuff. Junk it was, and junk it still is.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/01/another_junk_dna_denialist_on.php#more

The vast majority of biologists agree much of DNA has no function.

Rachel,

I really, really hope you meant evolution and not osmosis. I’ve never heard a scientist claim that DNA originated from the diffusion of water through a membrane…

In any case, the vast amount of scientific evidence for evolution means that very little faith is required to accept it.

And Priya, Chris is right. There is still a great deal we have yet to learn about so-called “junk” DNA.