Posted: Sep 15, 2013 11:41 pm
Welcome to the forum by the way. It's not often we get visitors from the "higher ups" in the ID community around here. Sincere kudos offered for being one of the few who actually bother to make falsifiable predictions.
I agree, but it certainly seems unlikely at this point. Of course in science, there are no absolute certainties.
Again, I actually agree with you. Though, I think many of your "followers" on UD and elsewhere don't particularly agree with this, if they are even aware that you think this.
Right, something like 12 out of close to 12.000 pseudogenes(estimated by the ENCODE project)?
Jonathan McLatchie wrote:@Rumraket: I don't know. It presently has no known function. But it is hard to rule out the possibility of it being found to have function in the future.
I agree, but it certainly seems unlikely at this point. Of course in science, there are no absolute certainties.
Jonathan McLatchie wrote: I'm sure that many pseudogenes are indeed "broken" relics (and I don't think this is at all inconsistent with ID).
Again, I actually agree with you. Though, I think many of your "followers" on UD and elsewhere don't particularly agree with this, if they are even aware that you think this.
Jonathan McLatchie wrote:But many pseudogenes are also functional.
Right, something like 12 out of close to 12.000 pseudogenes(estimated by the ENCODE project)?