Taq writes:
Does this refute the finding that the vast majority of the 200,000 ERVs in the human genome are junk DNA? Obviously not.
Hi!
I have questions on junk DNA in general. But feel free to ignore if they don't follow with what you're trying to do with this thread.
Is junk DNA
known to be "not used" for things somehow?
Is it tested somehow and shown to "not be required" for any other bodily function?
Or is junk DNA more of a term that means something like "we don't know of a function for this, and all other things we do know of functions for... so let's call this seemingly-extra-stuff junk DNA until something comes along."
I'm just wondering about a few things like this:
-sort of like the "we only use 10% of our brain" myth
-some people still believe this today
-however, no one seems to believe it so much that they're okay with a 90% brain-removal lobotomy and think they'll just go about their normal routine afterward
-can junk DNA actually be totally removed (somehow...) and we would be just fine?
-would such a procedure (if it were possible) possibly even be recommended for some reason?
Or something like this:
-the term "Dark Matter" is used in physics to describe "something that we can't identify" even though we can see some results/consequences of it
-is the term junk DNA anything like this?
-perhaps there are functions that occur and can't seem to be attributed to any aspect of the body, and some think "junk DNA" may be responsible? And in this sense the word "junk" would just be an unfortunate label?
™ Version 4.2
