this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
119 points (81.5% liked)

science

15014 readers
361 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
laverabe
m3t00
Joleee
[email protected]
119
It’s time to admit that genes are not the blueprint for life (www.nature.com)
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by kalkulat to c/science
75 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Review of 2023 book: How Life Works: A User’s Guide to the New Biology Philip Ball. ISBN9781529095999

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

You can second-guess the current state of the literature on junk dna all you want but unless you have a research budget it's a bit meaningless.

Also, I never said, and no scientist said, it was THE SINGLE AND ONLY mechanism influencing gene expression. Nobody also ever said the fact the "junk" is preserved was the CONCLUSIVE AND DEFINITIVE PROOF that it does something. Just that it's a good indicator.

You're not really responding to what the current hypotheses are.