# Behind the Shadow of Oz

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/behind-the-shadow-of-oz/152>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Created:** [May 6, 2018, 4:04pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/behind-the-shadow-of-oz/152 "2018-05-06T16:04:15Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 11

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Wayne\_Rossiter](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/wayne_rossiter/32/200_2.png) [@Wayne\_Rossiter](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Wayne_Rossiter)\
**Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 11:19pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/behind-the-shadow-of-oz/152/11 "2018-05-07T23:19:57Z")

</div>

Argon. Nice to meet you. I actually pressed some ID folks on the point you’ve raised. I asked, if we trust the ENCODE Project claim that 75%-80% of the genome is “functional,” why is that the line in the sand in terms of inferring design? What if it were just 50%-60%? Or just 35%? I never got a clear answer on that. I think their suspicions are that, when the dust settles, ~100% of the genome will be functional.

W

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/behind-the-shadow-of-oz/152)._