@DivinelyDesined Introns are non-coding, clipped gene elements that have no reason to be similar in non-related individuals, removing similarity by similar function. i.e. two independent authors writing about X may create similar sentences without plagiarism ... but not spelling mistakes.

@metacene_mark Introns are highly functional sections of the genome. They regulate gene expression, enable alternative splicing to produce multiple protein variants from one gene, and contain regulatory elements like enhancers. They are not "junk" or "mistakes" as you seem to be insinuating.

@DivinelyDesined Some 'junk' is now known to not be junk - but there still is some apparent junk. Some could be filler - functional as a spacer. Human insulin resembles chimpanzee insulin more closely than dog, rat, etc., in a hierarchical tree that repeats for other molecules. Spin that one.

@metacene_mark "Some 'junk' is now known to not be junk" Then it's not junk, is it? Research consistently uncovers function in the genomes where it was previously considered "junk." The trend is showing that nearly all the genome will be known to be functional. Humans and chimps are more

@DivinelyDesined I didn't give up the junk point - there's a fern with a genome 50x larger than a human's. There can be junk DNA, sometimes a lot of it. Your 'similarity of lifestyle' point won't cover transitions like the ancestors of whales returning to the oceans. They have landlubber clues.

@metacene_mark It's 50x larger - How do you know it's filled with junk? What if it needs 50x more generic variability? You're operating on pure assumption. And that's fine, just don't tell me your assumptions are evidence of something.

@DivinelyDesined You seem unconvinceable ... but fine, ignore the fern, or assume it's 50x more complicated than a human. It's odd you won't concede accumulations of genetic excess/obsolescence when we have macro examples: appendix, goosebumps, wisdom teeth, etc.

@metacene_mark I'm 100% open to being convinced. I just need more than your assumptions. 50x more information doesn't necessarily mean it's 50x more complex. It most likely means that it has 50x more adaptive variability programmed into it. Which is perfectly consistent with that myriad of