Creation vs. Evolution

[CabinetMaker]

Yes, mutations alter and destroy pre-existing information.
Of course not in one generation.

But even more unlikely in a few thousand generations. Mutations destroy... Natural selection eliminates.

Furthermore.......
Genesis 1:24 Then God said, “Let the earth produce every sort of animal, each producing offspring of the same kind—livestock, small animals that scurry along the ground, and wild animals.” And that is what happened. 25 God made all sorts of wild animals, livestock, and small animals, each able to produce offspring of the same kind. And God saw that it was good.

Your error is that you assume mutations always destroy information. A mutation alters information, good or bad is indeterminate until the gene is expressed as an allele. Any change that provides a benefit for an organism will be selected for over time by natural selection. All of this was designed by God.

 

[6days]

Can you define what you mean by "overall fitness" when applied to an organism that has increased fitness for its environment? "Overall fitness" is not a term I have ever seen used by biologists.

GC..... Who applied that wording of 'overall fitness' to an organism that has increased fitness?

What I said in explaining overall fitness ..... "mutations that have a beneficial outcome are the result of a lack of overall fitness. For example, island populations are highly adapted to a very specific environment, but les fit...fragile to slight environmental change.

If you want wording biologists would use... Island populations are often highly adapted to a very specific environment. This adaptation is actually the result of a loss of genetic variation.

 

[CabinetMaker]

That's nice speculation. Show us the messages that improved this way and then we'll have reason to believe your hypothesis. Shannon says you cannot get more information in a received message than what was sent. And Shannon is a great deal more established than your idea.


This isn't true. I'll give you all the beneficial mutations you can find as evidence for your hypothesis.

The mutation occurs in the gametes. That is the message that is sent. That is the message received by the individual.

I have seen seen some information where an extra chromosome is passed on for some reason. That is all new information that forms a new message for Shannon's theorem to operate.

 

[gcthomas]

GC..... Who applied that wording of 'overall fitness' to an organism that has increased fitness?

What I said in explaining overall fitness ..... "mutations that have a beneficial outcome are the result of a lack of overall fitness. For example, island populations are highly adapted to a very specific environment, but les fit...fragile to slight environmental change.

You are using the word 'fit' differently to the way biologists. Fitness doesn't refer to 'fitness for an environment in which the organism doesn't find itself' as you are. But thanks for clarifying that.

If you want wording biologists would use... Island populations are often highly adapted to a very specific environment. This adaptation is actually the result of a loss of genetic variation.

Loss of variation is natural selection in action, while increase in variation is mutation in action. Seems fine to me. But 'loss of variation' is not the same as 'fitness', with the former referring to the variety within a population, and the latter the ability to survive and reproduce. Different concepts - no wonder you are confused about the processes. Unless you are dissembling deliberately.

 

[iouae]

Cichlid fish change so rapidly because they have an extra set of chromosomes, giving them extra alleles which can be expressed. So, where most organisms have 2 alleles to choose from they have 4. They also have a jaw which is subject to great variation, so enabling these alleles to express themselves in a way which changes the jaw to adapt to any feeding environment.

For most organisms, extra chromosomes lead to diseases like Down's Syndrome, but in Cichlids, added chromosomes lead to added adaptability.

 

[6days]

Your error is that you assume mutations always destroy information.

It would be difficult or impossible to prove otherwise, even though in rare situations, there is a beneficial outcome. For ex. a mutation might cause a loss of specificity to an enzyme, providing a benefit...but the organism now has less genetic variation than the parent population.

A mutation alters information, good or bad is indeterminate until the gene is expressed as an allele. Any change that provides a benefit for an organism will be selected for over time by natural selection. All of this was designed by God.

That isn't really how it works.
You started with the assumption there is such a thing as a good mutation. It would be far easier to believe, based on evidence, that all mutations are slightly deleterious. In fact we have a couple hundred of these added to our genome with each successive generation. We have a couple harmful or deleterious mutations added to our genome with each successive generation. Our genome is crumbling....one geneticist refers to this as the population bomb. Your hope in beneficial mutations as our savior is nothing but a religious belief in evolutionism. Our hope as Christians should in the One who created man from the dust, and woman from mans side.... on the 6th literal day of the creation week.

 

[6days]

Cichlid fish change so rapidly because they have an extra set of chromosomes, giving them extra alleles which can be expressed. So, where most organisms have 2 alleles to choose from they have 4. They also have a jaw which is subject to great variation, so enabling these alleles to express themselves in a way which changes the jaw to adapt to any feeding environment.

For most organisms, extra chromosomes lead to diseases like Down's Syndrome, but in Cichlids, added chromosomes lead to added adaptability.

Yes...there is a thread on rapid adaptation and how that fits the Biblical model. Adaptation / variation/ speciation does not take bajillions of eons.

 

[gcthomas]

It would be difficult or impossible to prove otherwise, even though in rare situations, there is a beneficial outcome. For ex. a mutation might cause a loss of specificity to an enzyme, providing a benefit...but the organism now has less genetic variation than the parent population.

Tell us, 6Days, how does having an individual organism that has a new mutation that is different to the rest of the population result in less variation? Before, no mutation in the population. After, the same alleles, PLUS the mutation. Laughable.

You should have read my previous post, where I explained that it is selection that removes the variation which reduces fitness from a population, and mutation that increases variation. Get with it, 6D, you are starting to look like you are deliberately stupid.

 

[iouae]

Yes...there is a thread on rapid adaptation and how that fits the Biblical model. Adaptation / variation/ speciation does not take bajillions of eons.

Hi 6days

Variation can, under the right circumstances, occur quickly.

Organisms can accumulate DNA over time, lose it, or change it. All 3 lead to variations. For instance, one of the simplest single-celled animals, Amoeba proteus has more than 500 chromosomes in a large nucleus because of its proclivity to gain DNA. One would have expected such a simple animal to have little DNA.

Other organisms become isolated on say an island (like Darwin's finches) and lose DNA. Losing dominant genes can lead to the recessive alleles being expressed. An example might be blue eyes in the Irish, or blond hair in the Scandinavian nations, or "gingers".

Organisms have ways of coping with changing information in their DNA. The most obvious one is that mutations can kill them and this takes the mutation out with it.

A change of DNA (either by adding, subtracting or changing) can make the organism "fitter" for that environment and that animal may outcompete all others. This is totally in line with the Bible, and what we see, including cichlids suited to all fresh water lakes in Africa.

 

[CabinetMaker]

It would be difficult or impossible to prove otherwise, even though in rare situations, there is a beneficial outcome. For ex. a mutation might cause a loss of specificity to an enzyme, providing a benefit...but the organism now has less genetic variation than the parent population.

Actually, it has more as the new individual has a benefit that the parent population does not.


_

That isn't really how it works.
You started with the assumption there is such a thing as a good mutation.

No, I did not. I started with the assumption that there is a mutation. I stated that it is unknowable as To whether that mutation is beneficial or delitorious until the mutation is expressed as an allele.

It would be far easier to believe, based on evidence, that all mutations are slightly deleterious.

What evidence? There are many early experiments in plant genetics where some mutations were also found to be beneficial while others were neither.

In fact we have a couple hundred of these added to our genome with each successive generation. We have a couple harmful or deleterious mutations added to our genome with each successive generation. Our genome is crumbling....one geneticist refers to this as the population bomb. Your hope in beneficial mutations as our savior is nothing but a religious belief in evolutionism. Our hope as Christians should in the One who created man from the dust, and woman from mans side.... on the 6th literal day of the creation week.

Yes, we have a very large amount genetic disorders. My daughter has one and my niece is dying from one.

Ny Faith lies in God. God is not a magician who routinely grants healing nor do I expect Him to be so. I am His servant, He us not mine. Evolution does not change this at all.

 

[Yorzhik]

Shannon was indeed concerned with messages and more importantly the transmission of them, but DNA represents information not a message to be transmitted. Transcription of that information is not the same thing as transmitting it, you are imo misapplying Shannon theory for no good rational reason at all.

First, the message isn't, technically, entirely transcribed. Part of the process includes transcription, but messages in the cell in general, and my example in particular, include transfer and transmission as well. You certainly can't reduce the process of moving information to the next generation entirely to transcription.

Second, transcription is still a form of transmission. So even if you want to make that distinction, your claim is still just plain wrong.

 

[Yorzhik]

The mutation occurs in the gametes. That is the message that is sent. That is the message received by the individual.

I have seen seen some information where an extra chromosome is passed on for some reason. That is all new information that forms a new message for Shannon's theorem to operate.

Bingo. Hence, Shannon ultimately requires you to provide evidence that mutation+NS can create all the diversity of life we have on earth today from a single hypothetical proto-cell.

 

[gcthomas]

Bingo. Hence, Shannon ultimately requires you to provide evidence that mutation+NS can create all the diversity of life we have on earth today from a single hypothetical proto-cell.

No. Shannon's theory tells you what bandwidth channel you need to reconstitute your signal in the presence of noise. That's all, since you still conflate Shannon information with semantic meaning, despite having your mistake pointed out to you by several people.

 

[patrick jane]

Cichlid fish change so rapidly because they have an extra set of chromosomes, giving them extra alleles which can be expressed. So, where most organisms have 2 alleles to choose from they have 4. They also have a jaw which is subject to great variation, so enabling these alleles to express themselves in a way which changes the jaw to adapt to any feeding environment.

For most organisms, extra chromosomes lead to diseases like Down's Syndrome, but in Cichlids, added chromosomes lead to added adaptability.

I like cichlids. I had a Jack Dempsey for awhile -

View attachment 23786

 

[CabinetMaker]

Bingo. Hence, Shannon ultimately requires you to provide evidence that mutation+NS can create all the diversity of life we have on earth today from a single hypothetical proto-cell.

As previously stated, DNA and evolution were created by God to achieve His goals. I am a creationist at heart even though I believe that God took a very long time.

 

[patrick jane]

2 monster threads by each other on the board, this one and keep a word change a word.

Both were started at nearly the same time in 2013

 

[iouae]

I like cichlids. I had a Jack Dempsey for awhile -

View attachment 23786

Hi Patrick Jane

I had angelfish which are cichlids. Amazing that they and Jack Dempseys are close kin.

 

[alwight]

First, the message isn't, technically, entirely transcribed. Part of the process includes transcription, but messages in the cell in general, and my example in particular, include transfer and transmission as well. You certainly can't reduce the process of moving information to the next generation entirely to transcription.

Second, transcription is still a form of transmission. So even if you want to make that distinction, your claim is still just plain wrong.

Transmission is the reproduction of the original message so that it hopefully remains unchanged from point to point. Transcription otoh is an interpretation into a different form, say, a digital signal can be transcribed into sound and the sound can be transmitted into the ear. Transcription and transmission may be related but nevertheless are two different things, so imo it's you who is wrong here.

 

[6days]

Tell us, 6Days, how does having an individual organism that has a new mutation that is different to the rest of the population result in less variation? Before, no mutation in the population. After, the same alleles, PLUS the mutation. Laughable
You should have read my previous post, where I explained that it is selection that removes the variation which reduces fitness from a population, and mutation that increases variation. Get with it, 6D, you are starting to look like you are deliberately stupid.

So in your world GC, a loss of function mutation is actually an increase of variation?
I have heard that "laughable" and "stupid" explanation before. It always is a bit mind boggling that evolutionists will call a 'decrease', an 'increase'.

You should have read my explanation how island populations often are highly adapted but have less genetic variation than parent populations. (mutations AND selection)
"Island populations are much more prone to extinction than mainland populations. The reasons for this remain controversial. If inbreeding and loss of genetic variation are involved, then genetic variation must be lower on average in island than mainland populations. Published data on levels of genetic variation for allozymes, nuclear DNA markers, mitochondrial DNA, inversions and quantitative characters in island and mainland populations were analysed. A large and highly significant majority of island populations have less allozyme genetic variation than their mainland counterparts (165 of 202 comparisons), the average reduction being 29 per cent. The magnitude of differences was related to dispersal ability. There were related differences for all the other measures. Island endemic species showed lower genetic variation than related mainland species in 34 of 38 cases. The proportionate reduction in genetic variation was significantly greater in island endemic than in nonendemic island populations in mammals and birds, but not in insects. Genetic factors cannot be discounted as a cause of higher extinction rates of island than mainland populations."
http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v78/n3/abs/hdy199746a.html

 

[6days]

I am a creationist at heart even though I believe that God took a very long time.

It would be better if you trusted Him, in the way He said that He created. "You have six days each week for your ordinary work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath day of rest dedicated to the lord your God. On that day no one in your household may do any work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your livestock, and any foreigners living among you. For in six days the lord made the heavens, the earth, the sea, and everything in them"