Summations Only

But its absurd. By your same logic there can never be any novel ideas written down because they're just going to be combinations of pre-existing words and letters and never de-novo. As I said in Message 218:

quote:

---

Think of it this way: There's only 27 letters in the alphabet. All words are just going to be combinations of those pre-existing letter. No new letters come about so according to the Creation mindset; no new information can ever be created. A new book comming out tomorrow with totally novel ideas cannot be considered new information, according to the Creation mindset, because its just using already existing words and letters so no new information is really created.

​

But that's bullshit. Of course new information can come out by combining pre-existing words and letters to form new ideas. Just like new information can come about from mutations to DNA that re-arrange the ATCG's into new combinations.

---

You're right, that if its completely random then you won't get much. But the Theory of Evolution doesn't describe it as being completely random, there is a selective pressure too.So, in this case, it be like throwing a handful of Scrabble tiles on the floor and then selecting the groups of tiles that did happen to make words, pickinging up the rest of the tiles that didn't, and then throwing them back out again, selecting the groups of tiles that did happen to make words, pickinging up the rest of the tiles that didn't, and then throwing them back out again, and so on.Soon enough, you'll have yourself some words that have been randomly generated from the tiles. You see, though, its not completely random because you have that selective pressure. Any time a mutation adds anything to the genome it is truly new information. Just like you can rearrange existing words to form new ideas, a rearrangement of existing genomic information is the origination of new information in the genome.In the case of the E. coli, that one section of the genome was copied and pasted, and it resulted in an whole novel ability for the species. Again, with this logic, nobody can ever write down a novel idea because they're just using existing words. But we know that's bullshit.

So do you really believe this crap or are you just scoring debate points?'Cause I could explain evolution to you... but you seem to just want to oppose any sense of it rather than try to understand it.So? Yea or nay?

Hundreds of millions of years ago, it would not have been a human Y chromosome. Humans weren't alive that long ago. Sure it is. You can't say that it has to have evolved by X much, because the selective pressures could weed out many of the mutations. There is not a minimum amount of mutation that must happen over a given timeframe.But by comparing it to ealier human Y chromosomes, we can see that it has too many mutations to have happend in the last <10,000 years. There is a maximum amount of mutation that can be said to have happened within a given timeframe.By studying the human Y chromosome, we can see that the creation scenario is impossible and we can see that the evolutionary scenario is plausible.