The term "junk DNA" began to be used in the late 1950s[26] but Susumu Ohno popularized the term in a 1972 paper titled "So much 'junk' DNA in our genome" where he summarized the current evidence that had accumulated by then.
In a second paper that same year, he concluded that 90% of mammalian genomes consisted of nonfunctional DNA. The case for junk DNA was summarized in a lengthy paper by David Comings in 1972 where he listed four reasons for proposing junk DNA:
This is a pretty standard modus operandi in science and medicine. They float unscientific notions, very subtly at first and then build up the rhetoric until they have most people believing things like:
Men can become women and vice versa
Cows cause global warming
Natural immunity is inconsequential
Animal fats are bad for heart
Etc etc.
And in each case unravelling these lies all the way back to the "original lie" is extremely hard due to "layering" of literature.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA
Wow. I stand corrected. He was an expert...and wields a samurai sword, by the sound of it.
Pretty amazing to make a case for any DNA being "junk." That is a version of the "prove a negative" problem in logic.
This is a pretty standard modus operandi in science and medicine. They float unscientific notions, very subtly at first and then build up the rhetoric until they have most people believing things like:
Men can become women and vice versa
Cows cause global warming
Natural immunity is inconsequential
Animal fats are bad for heart
Etc etc.
And in each case unravelling these lies all the way back to the "original lie" is extremely hard due to "layering" of literature.