If the reader gets lost in this chapter, be of good cheer because you are in company with some of the best minds of science. So-called junk DNA is kind of like what they call vestigial organs. There used to be over a hundred in the human body that were supposed to prove that God didn’t know what he was doing. Unfortunately for the atheist the list has been narrowed down about 90%. It seems that the junk DNA that atheists hailed as the ultimate proof of God’s ineptitude is also proving that the know-it-all’s do not know the hundredth part of what goes on in a human organism. Like all of us, they can watch things happen but they can only guess what exactly it is that makes it do that. If reality was proved otherwise, then we certainly would not have to worry about the many diseases that still trouble us.
I’ll keep this as simple as I can, but you can be assured that everything that I describe here is anything but simple. After nearly half a century of study of the human genome, and billions of dollars of research money, it appears that we know less now than when we started about DNA and how the information contained in it is used in the human organism. We thought that we broke the code that would ultimately reveal all of the mysteries of life but we have found that there is another much more complicated and mysterious mechanism within DNA including the so called junk that has heretofore been largely disregarded as nearly useless. It was useless because we did not understand its function. In today’s pseudo science that is how they do things. Any evidence that tends to prove that man himself is not God is called junk.
So we are just talking about a small portion of the total DNA right? Wrong. We are talking about 95% of it. We have broken the code that interprets just 5% of the total amount of information contained in DNA. Even that 5% presents countless mysteries of how that information is manipulated and altered within the human body. It is not like reading a recipe book and baking a cake like Richard Dawkins would have us believe. This "recipe book" is more like 5,000 stacks of books in a huge pile. It is written in a language that we do not understand and we do not have the slightest idea what parts of this pile of "junk" information are used for what. But it is not as simple as that, really. Even if we did know what part of the pile was appropriate, we do not know at what times that information is turned on and off or how it is otherwise regulated.
In other words, the 30,000 or so genes that we have found (or rather computer simulation supposedly found) in the human genome are only one small piece of the puzzle. The other pieces are scattered hither and yon and are virtually hidden from our view. Of course the whole puzzle is microscopic, and the pieces change their shapes from time to time, and disappear and reappear mysteriously just to keep us on our toes. But anyway, enough of my inadequate analogies, let’s hear from some experts here.
Ever heard of a "transposon"? Transposons are different sections of the DNA that can move around to different positions in the genome of a single cell. Some call them "jumping genes," They are cut out and then pasted into different sections, thereby altering the sequence of information within the DNA. It is kind of like reading a novel, and just about the time you get to the exciting part you find that the next 10 pages have been removed. Now what? Well maybe somebody pasted them into your mother’s old cookbook that you think is in the attack. So you look through all of the books, and you finally find the pages, and as you continue to read you find more pages missing, and so on.
The transposons can delete information from the DNA or they can mutate it or they can translocate it. Slippery little devils aren’t they? Now let’s look at "retrotransposons." They are similar to transposons but they work on the RNA. You may remember that this RNA is essentially a copy of the DNA, but not always. After the RNA has made its copy, parts of it may be cut out and pasted. Where do you think they are pasted? No, bad guess, they are pasted back into the DNA thereby altering the instructions that were in it initially. Many retrotransposons have "long terminal repeats" (LTR’s) at their ends that may contain over 1,000 base pairs each. About 40% of the entire human genome consists of retrotransposons. It is all much more complicated than I am making it sound here. We have not even mentioned LINES (long interspaced elements), or SINES (short interspaced elements) and quite a few other things, but I think you get the point. Even if you do get the point however, all of this information really does not help us much because we are still only in the books! We haven’t even got to how this confusing jumble of information is used and manipulated once its meaning is discovered.
A completely different field of research is needed to determine how the cell further manipulates the information and variously interprets it depending on the myriads of environmental possibilities available within an organism. For instance there is "feedback" information to consider. That is intercommunication within the body which gives new instructions to appropriate cells which in turn alter the function of other cells which in turn change the information in another and so on. Simply trying to break the code will not yield the answers to the countless problems that are encountered. The myriad of combinations of amino acids contained in myriads of proteins represent coded information. This opens up a new field of research called "proteonics." What exactly are these coded proteins doing when they disappear into the organism? Which ones do what where, and for how long? What tells them to start and stop, etc.?
So far there has been several uses found for this junk DNA in case anyone still thinks that it is an unimportant diversion. It has been shown to be an essential part of the structure of the nucleus. Statistical analysis of long sections of this so-called junk has shown that it resembles human language. Isn’t that fascinating? It is very possible that the 3-letter code of DNA that basically determines how a protein is made is only a scratch on the surface compared to a real language contained in a code that may be known only to God. A real language! To me this stuff is just amazing, but there is more. Let’s hear directly from the experts on this subject:
Another function of the junk DNA is to maintain the integrity of the Chromosomes during cell division. "Specific non-coding (junk) DNA sequences within selected Chromosome domains participate in more complex levels of Chromosome folding, and index different genetic compartment for orderly transcription and replication." I really don’t think we should call this stuff junk anymore, do you? "The unique 3d structure created by this mysterious DNA also controls the expression of specific genes in cells of differentiated cell types. This so called non-coding DNA is essential in other ways such as regulation of functions and recognition of amino acids during the protein translation process, fetal development and embriogenesis, proper framing for translation of proteins." If it weren’t for the "junk" DNA the cell would produce "junk" proteins.
There are several other functions that I won’t bother with here because I think that most people have got the point by now. I really do not see how anyone cannot see intelligent intervention in all of this. Even if you don’t see it here I think it is rather obvious that mankind has just begun to understand the mysteries of life. For years we have been led to believe that scientists had all of the answers to life as they were contained in DNA. Now the story must be changed again in order to fit with the latest mystery. One honest researcher answered the mystery by saying that there is a century of work left to do. I don’t think that he is even half right. As Michael Behe says, they will only find another black box full of more complexity and mystery.
I cannot help but to comment here about a certain news item that came out on February 21, 2001, shortly after the rough draft of the human genome was published. While much of the scientific world was scratching their head over the implications of the brevity of the known part of the human genome, a certain Arthur Caplan, Ph. D. authoritatively posted his arrogant conclusions on the MSNBC website under the headline, "Darwin Vindicated":
My my how we have placed folly in such dignity. "Jerry-rigged?" Anyway let’s hear from some of the more humble researchers:
Most but not all of the above quotes were from Jaan Suurkula, MD. For more information see the book, Genetic Engineering, Dreams or Nightmares 1998 by Mae-Wan Ho.
As I researched this issue of junk DNA I was pleasantly surprised to find that many reputable names in the field candidly admit to their lack of knowledge about what really goes on in the biological cell. I appreciate that honesty. I have come to another conclusion while doing the research for this book and that is that the field is full of dedicated people who are trying to help sick people. It is really a shame that the loud mouths cast doubt on an honorable profession by making ridiculous claims that are simply wishful thinking. I do not know how anyone can conclude that there is no God when we consider not only the evidence, but also that which is unknown. It can be nothing less than arrogance for someone to make the definitive statement that there is no God. It seems like we are finding more evidence of his presence everyday as the mysteries of life become more profound.
It has now become clear that certain genes do not necessarily produce certain traits. The genes are only a small part of the overall system, and depend on the whole environment that they operate in. Simply splicing genes from one place in the DNA to another is certainly not the answer. Each change causes a chain reaction that is largely unknown. These reactions may not surface for generations after the damage has been done. The human organism is far too complicated to play with as if we were God. Those who wish to do the work of a healer should do it reverently with understanding of the unknown consequences of their intervention. I think that the fields of science that are dedicated to healing sick people are noble fields. It is really a shame that so much of it is now dedicated to trying to prove that there is no God when the evidence of a creator is constantly screaming at them.
We have not even discussed half of the mysteries that remain in regard to the human genome. We did not even mention histones. These were formerly believed to be simply the structural part of the DNA ladder. Now some are finding reason to believe that even this part of the DNA contains a coded language (see "The Language of Coavalent Histone Modifications" Quantum Wave Predominance in Proteins, Nanobiology, 1993, p2, 31-33). by, Brian D. Strahl and C. David Allis, Nature Vol. 403 p. 41-45, 2000). Others are discussing the possibility that the entire field will have to look toward the quantum physical level. As gravity supposedly works by way of invisible waves, it is now seriously believed by some that the biological processes in a living organism also work according to similar laws. Einstein upset much of established science with his findings, so now it is speculated that these laws that he and others discovered also play a part in the life process.
Life is not as simple as some would have us believe. Our life is not now coded and categorized by the genome project. It is not now just a matter of a little more work before we have it all figured out. The unwarranted assumption that there is no God is based entirely on a lack of evidence and the examination of a few pieces of a puzzle that is intricately connected to more puzzles of an ever-changing nature. How can a rational person call a hugely complicated system that has not been explored to a fraction of its intricacy a pile of largely "useless junk"? What would cause a biologist, of all people, who is keenly aware of the unknown complexity of a living organism, to conclude that the portion that he does not understand is useless "noise"?
Some years ago a European car manufacturer decided to improve on a certain General Motors transmission. After disassembling the GM product they discovered a certain clutch mechanism that they thought should be machined more thoroughly because it was too rough for the exacting standards that were to be incorporated into the improved product. After reassembly the transmission did not work properly. As it turned out the roughness was included in the original design and it was essential to the proper operation of the transmission. The engineers at GM knew exactly what they were doing, and the so called flaw was intentional. This attempt at improvement was an honest mistake made by people who were interested in producing a quality product. But can we say the same about someone who spends his entire life trying to destroy rational belief in a creator while at the same time repressing the fact that his "proof" amounts to that which he does not know? Is this modern science - speculation of the unknown presented as proof? If it is, then its detractors are justified in calling it "blind faith in myths" that are perpetuated at the expense of rational judgment.
DNA is not life. It is not the recipe for making life except in a tangential way. This shows the problem with taking otherwise sound analogies too far. DNA was first compared to a blue print like a building plan. That was a good start. Then it was called an encyclopedia, and that added to the explanation some. As the intricacy of living organisms was explored further it was called by some a dictionary which must be accessed by an intricate mechanism that picks and chooses information contained therein according to various feedback mechanisms, environmental factors and even the thought processes of the individual. I really do not know exactly what DNA will or can do in every instance and neither does anyone else. The proper analogy, however, at this point would seem to lean toward all of the above. Combine this intricacy with the complexity and information that exists apart from the actual manipulation of the information in DNA. Did you know that even today’s modern computers can’t keep up with the intricacy? The computer models that you hear about that "prove" one thing or the other often represent only a stripped down version of reality. All of the "junk" has been removed from consideration. The determination of what is and what is not junk is of course made by junk evolutionary science, which concluded that God himself is so much junk that should not be considered before even one experiment is undertaken.
Now I can almost hear the retort: But if a supernatural explanation is considered it is not science. My response to that is exactly one of the overall points of this book - Modern science has no place in determining whether God does or does not exist. All appeals to this modern version of science to prove that God may not, cannot or apparently does not exist are inherently absurd because the evidence of a creator is by definition excluded from consideration. Nevertheless the proper use of real science, when it considers known laws, facts, and the common experience of mankind validated by generations of experimentation without exception, proves that intelligence is necessary to create life. There may have been some wiggle room when life was thought of as various globs of goo. But with the discovery of DNA, the entire structure of atheism collapsed. There is a God. Get used to reality.