Rethinking junk DNA

Phronesis said:
Oh look, more trolling. Here is a tip. Contributing to a thread means actually posting material that is relevant. Here is another tip. Go to pubmed and search the word DNA. Any kid with internet can do old chap, why you can't is beyond me...
Click to expand...

Because I wanted you to do it.
Your answer: 1039311 articles poppes up (increases monthly). Since 1972? Probably less than 1039311 articles. Do you want an exact answer?
Click to expand...

Yes, I wanted an exact answer, should be easy. Go to it.

My turn to ask dumbass questions. Do you understand that reductionism is not used to detect things?
Click to expand...

Do you understand that non-existant things cannot be detected by any methodology?
 
Ah look who does not answer the question. Pfff, go troll somewhere.

alloytoo said:
Do you understand that non-existant things cannot be detected by any methodology?
Click to expand...
Is that why you can't present any scientific evidence that you have a mind? Who woulda thought...
 
Last edited:
Phronesis said:
Ah look who does not answer the question. Pfff, go troll somewhere.
Click to expand...

I guess you still don't understand that something that doesn't exist cannot be detected.

You persistantly repeat the same silly question, which was never relevant in the first place.

But lets stay on topic.

How many papers have been published on DNA since 1972?

More than a million?
>1000000
> 900000
> 800000
> 700000?

Here's an interesting history on the word "junk".

Word History: The word junk is an example of the change in meaning known as generalization, and very aptly too, since the amount of junk in the world seems to be generalizing and proliferating rapidly. The Middle English word jonk, ancestor of junk, originally had a very specific meaning restricted to nautical terminology. First recorded in 1353, the word meant "an old cable or rope." On a sailing ship it made little sense to throw away useful material since considerable time might pass before one could get new supplies. Old cable was used in a variety of ways, for example, to make fenders, that is, material hung over the side of the ship to protect it from scraping other ships or wharves. Junk came to refer to this old cable as well. The big leap in meaning taken by the word seems to have occurred when junk was applied to discarded but useful material in general. This extension may also have taken place in a nautical context, for the earliest, more generalized use of junk is found in the compound junk shop, referring to a store where old materials from ships were sold. Junk has gone on to mean useless waste as well.
Click to expand...

Interesting that 'junk' originally meant something that was discarded but retained some value and could be reused.

I think since 1972 the meaning of 'Junk DNA' has probably drifted from the useless to the truer mean of junk.

Science does that.
 
Look troll, you can't even answer a simple question and then ask others to answer yours.

Your amusing effort to try and post something relevant is... well hilarious. Now go troll somewhere else.
 
Phronesis said:
Look troll, you can't even answer a simple question and then ask others to answer yours.

Your amusing effort to try and post something relevant is... well hilarious. Now go troll somewhere else.
Click to expand...

How many papers have been published on DNA since Susumu Ohno coined the phrase in 1972?
 
Hey, look who still can't use pubmed. Shame man.

Waiting for you to provide scientific evidence that you have a mind though. At least you understand that something that doesn't exist cannot be detected.
 
Phronesis said:
Look troll, you can't even answer a simple question and then ask others to answer yours.

Your amusing effort to try and post something relevant is... well hilarious. Now go troll somewhere else.
Click to expand...

I see you have reverted to Junk Posting again. :eek:
 
So now you understand the response you are getting in your spammed threads?
 
Ah, posting science is considered as junk by you. I forgot about that one. No wonder you troll the science section. Shame man, when people put Xs and Ys in a sentnece it gets even worse and your brain goes all mushy. Life must be terribly tough for trolls, after all, you are badly designed if you were designed... well if you believe that nonsense anyway.
 
You keep providing the ammunition necessary to shoot you down. Awesome. Keep it up.
 
Saying it over and over and over and over and over may serve to reinforce your propaganda claims that I am a troll.

This will never make it so. I respond as I choose and not as you would love me to. Get with it, it will do everyone much good.

What is funny as all hell is when you display the same behavior you pretend to abhor in just about every post that is *not* cut and pasted.

Way to go mate.
 
cyghost said:
Saying it over and over and over and over and over may serve to reinforce your propaganda claims that I am a troll.

This will never make it so. I respond as I choose and not as you would love me to. Get with it, it will do everyone much good.

What is funny as all hell is when you display the same behavior you pretend to abhor in just about every post that is *not* cut and pasted.

Way to go mate.
Click to expand...

How to make a troll's brain go all mushy.

Step 1: Ask the troll to detect the idiocy in the following:
Forumite X creates thread.
Forumite Y derails the threads.
Forumite X goes off topic to address forumite Y.
Forumite Y laughs at forumite X for going off topic.

Step 2: Watch troll go berserk and think it is being clever.

Step 3: Watch troll blaming others for going off topic.

Step 4: Mission accomplished. The troll's brain is now mush and you can continue to toy with it.
 
Ah, more bad generalizations by MyBB's anti-intellectual and anti-scientific "intellectual elite".
 
Phronesis said:
How to make a troll's brain go all mushy.

Step 1: Ask the troll to detect the idiocy in the following:
Forumite X creates thread.
Forumite Y derails the threads.
Forumite X goes off topic to address forumite Y.
Forumite Y laughs at forumite X for going off topic.

Step 2: Watch troll go berserk and think it is being clever.

Step 3: Watch troll blaming others for going off topic.

Step 4: Mission accomplished. The troll's brain is now mush and you can continue to toy with it.
Click to expand...
I notice that things in phrony land do not correspond to reality very well. I wonder why that is? :)

I presume I am troll in above story? If so a few observations: I never blame anyone for going off topic. I don't mind if things go off topic, I know that they just do.

At most I point out the hypocrisy of some who do pretend to dislike it intensely but who are happy to do so at will.

So toy away, much man. You are fooiling no one. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X