It’s another example of a paper that sounds like it could have been written by a proponent of intelligent design.
Proponents of intelligent design would agree that biology is imperfect and biomedicine should be encouraged to cure diseases and fix problems.
I won’t recap the splendid work Emily Reeves has already done here in dissecting the TEDx talk from a scientific angle.
Biology is a lavish display of sophisticated designs exceeding all human engineering to date.
Some defenders of evolutionary orthodoxy would have us believe that we’ve only found a handful of non-coding DNA sequences that have function.