O mito do DNA lixo

A descoberta na década de 1970 de que apenas uma pequena porcentagem de nossos códigos de DNA para proteínas levou alguns biólogos proeminentes na época a sugerir que a maior parte do nosso DNA se tratava de lixo sem função. Embora outros biólogos tenham previsto que a proteína não codificante do DNA viria a ser funcional, a ideia de que a maior parte de nosso DNA era lixo se tornou a visão dominante entre os biólogos. Essa visão tornou-se espetacularmente errada. Desde 1990 - e, especialmente, após a conclusão do Projeto Genoma Humano, em 2003 - muitas centenas de artigos foram publicados na literatura científica documentando as diversas funções da proteína não codificante do DNA, e mais estão sendo publicados a cada semana. O livro The Mith of Junk DNA, de Jonathan Wells, documenta essa reviravolta. Resta saber se alguma editora secular brasileira terá coragem de publicar esse livro ou se apenas obras de Richard Dawkins e sua turma continuarão a ter espaço por estas bandas. O segundo livro de Michael Behe, The Edge of Evolution, e o Signature in The Cell, de Stephen Meyer (para citar apenas dois exemplos) continuam inacessíveis para os leitores da língua portuguesa.[MB]
[/b]

O mito do DNA lixo: a falência epistêmica da Síntese Evolutiva Moderna

Terça-feira, Maio 03, 2011

Preface to The Myth of Junk DNA by Jonathan Wells

Evolution News & Views May 3, 2011 4:00 AM | Permalink

[Editor's Note: The following is an excerpt from Jonathan Wells' new book, The Myth of Junk DNA, out this month.]

The discovery in the 1970s that only a tiny percentage of our DNA codes for proteins prompted some prominent biologists at the time to suggest that most of our DNA is functionless junk. Although other biologists predicted that non-protein-coding DNA would turn out to be functional, the idea that most of our DNA is junk became the dominant view among biologists.


That view has turned out to be spectacularly wrong. Since 1990--and especially after completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003--many hundreds of articles have appeared in the scientific literature documenting the various functions of non-protein coding DNA, and more are being published every week.


Ironically, even after evidence for the functionality of non-protein coding DNA began flooding into the scientific literature, some leading apologists for Darwinian evolution ratcheted up claims that "junk DNA" provides evidence for their theory and evidence against intelligent design. Since 2004, biologists Richard Dawkins, Douglas Futuyma, Kenneth Miller, Jerry Coyne and John Avise have published books using this argument. So have philosopher of science Philip Kitcher and historian of science Michael Shermer. So has Francis Collins, former head of the Human Genome Project and present director of the National Institutes of Health, despite the fact that he co-authored some of the scientific articles providing evidence against "junk DNA."


These authors claim to speak for "science," but they have actually been promoting an anti-scientific myth that ignores the evidence and relies on theological speculations instead. For the sake of science, it's time to expose the myth for what it is.


Far from consisting mainly of junk that provides evidence against intelligent design, our genome is increasingly revealing itself to be a multidimensional, integrated system in which non-protein-coding DNA performs a wide variety of functions. If anything, it provides evidence for intelligent design. Even apart from possible implications for intelligent design, however, the demise of the myth of junk DNA promises to stimulate more research into the mysteries of the genome. These are exciting times for scientists willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads


Visit the book website for more about The Myth of Junk DNA by Jonathan Wells.