I believe the ENCODE project has shown the junk dna hypothesis is not clearly true. A large portion of the genome codes for something, somewhere above 70 perce

I believe the ENCODE project has shown the junk dna hypothesis is not clearly true. A large portion of the genome codes for something, somewhere above 70 percent, even if most of it doesn't create proteins directly. As an analogy, a piece of well written code often has a lot of extra info not directly tied to its core function, such as logging, error handling, etc. Much could be removed without impacting the core function, but that doesn't mean it is junk code.