Rewriting History Won't Erase Bad Evolutionary Predictions
While many evolutionists adamantly maintain that the vast majority of the human genome is junk, even in the face of the ENCODE consortium's compelling experimental results, others have tried hedging their bets by embracing ENCODE's research. In fact, some of the latter even attempt to revise history by claiming that evolutionary biology expected all along to find what ENCODE found: mass functionality in the human genome.
Others are more forthright. They don't deny evolutionary biology's bad predictions, and they admit that new models are needed to accommodate ENCODE's data. In other words, they accept ENCODE's conclusions and admit they can't explain them in evolutionary terms.
is a scientist and an attorney with a PhD in Geology from the University of Johannesburg and a JD from the University of San Diego. In his day job, he works as Associate Director of the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute, helping to oversee the intelligent design (ID) research program and defending academic freedom for scientists who support intelligent design. Dr. Luskin has written and spoken widely on the scientific mechanics and implications of both intelligent design and evolution. He also volunteers for the "IDEA Center," a non-profit that helps students to start IDEA Clubs on their college and high school campuses. He lives and works in Seattle, Washington, where he and his wife are avid enjoyers of the outdoors.This article originally appeared in Salvo, Issue #34, Fall 2015 Copyright © 2022 Salvo | www.salvomag.com https://salvomag.com/article/salvo34/the-encode-embroilment-part-iv