Transposons or “jumping genes”, earlier viewed as "junk":
Later researchers have found similar results—that TEs can influence gene transcription—in other species, such as fruit flies, morning glory flowers, and (vindicating McClintock's suspicions) maize (Slotkin & Martienssen, 2007). Moreover, in primates, scientists have identified a SINE known as Alu that seems to play an important role in gene regulation and evolution. These new discoveries are prompting scientists to think twice about dismissing such a large portion of the genome as nothing but "junk."
Recently scientists have established that the older the man, the greater the chance that his children will be born with abnormalities. So, some of his gene sequences are skipped, creating mutated strands. Contrary to de novo mutations which occur during cell division, inherited gene mutations are transferred at an equal rate by the father and mother, are more common and thus more commonly responsible for disease. Scientists believe that both inherited and new mutations are responsible for diseases like autism and schizophrenia, but have not worked out the ratio of blame. On the positive side, de novo gene mutations are a necessary element, allowing us to adapt to our changing environment.
In some cases DNA sequences are duplicated, e.g. men with XYY chromosomes. So letters to the code are constantly being added or subtracted. Certainly, similar processes would be taking place in the DNA of trees and plants.
Your arrogant (but very humorous and crude) scientist will obviously not benefit from above mentioned research, because he has made his mind up that all inactive DNA ("the white stuff") is junk. By the way, the coding of proteins by m-RNA is a separate process. Because m-RNA doesn't use the "white bits," (e.g., transposons or "jumping genes") does that mean it should all be classified as junk? I call it bad science.