[benkahuna]

Good quick summary.

To be a little more precise, exon DNA encodes proteins. A gene on the other hand is the unit of heritable information. As you mentioned genes may encode proteins (or parts thereof) or may have regulatory roles. There are genes with known functions in intron DNA. (I believe you know this, but you probably wrote your summary rather quickly)

Furthermore, it's not like there is some great mystery about the potential of intron DNA. There are established start codons and we've figured out the 64 combinations of DNA codons and whether they start or stop RNA transcription (the making of RNA from DNA) or code for one of the 20 amino acids.

Since the human genome project was completed (by both private and public entitites), we have a complete map of the human genome. Work since the project was completed has involved signficant annotation of the genomic data with proteomic data, information about what regions code for what proteins. When you actually find out what we know, it's a lot less mysterious and you can't so easily just point to the mysterious thing (psychics love talking about coupled particles and their "violation" of locality) and give it extraordinary power as the OP gives to intronic DNA. It's a classic rhetorical trick to lazily prove that which cannot be proven.

Obviously with 20 amino acids, start and stop codes, there are a full 42 unused codons, right? Wrong. There are redundant codons that code for the same amino acid. A codon consists of a group of 3 consecutive nucleotides on a DNA chromosome (not redundant here as some viruses use RNA as their source of heritable genetic material). There are 64 permutations of 3 nucleotides taken 4 at a time. Redundancy helps guard against problems related to the accidental change of one nucleotide for another.

The whole idea that there's a single gene for speech is simply preposterous.