Perhaps you could eplain what your definition of macroevolution would be and what measure of information you are referring to.
For instance could the simplification and loss of features seen in parasites be considered to be macroevolution ? Why would that be considered a gain in information ?
quote:Opinion is not the main power of science. Logic, evidence, and repeatability is.
quote:Repeatability is a power and asset of experimental science, but not necessarily of historical science where we try and examine the past.
Repeatability is very much a part of historical science.
When many different scientists all over the world find the same kinds of organisms in the same geologic layers, that is a repeated test of the theory that the geologic column is consistent across the entire Earth.
When many different geologists independently date rocks from different parts of the geologic column over and over and over again, and they consistently show consistent dates for the rocks, that is repeatability.
quote:As for logic and evidence - they are important in science, but can only go so far.
...only go so far in what endeavor?
Logic and evidence has gotten humans to the moon and back, have eliminated small pox, and have made it possible for us to write messages on a keyboard and people anywhere in the world can read them nearly instantly.
Macroevolution is a gaining of information - correct? In other words, DNA information must be added to add on new characteristics that weren't there before - right?
In a word, no.
I'm not sure how you're defining macroevolution, but for the sake of discussion let us say that it is evolution from one species to another. Speciation not only isn't defined as a gain of information, it isn't even defined in terms of information in any way. Not only that, but assuming you're using a definition of information from either Gitt or Spetner, your definition of information is completely unrelated to actual information theory. This isn't the right forum to get into an explanation of what information theory really is (perhaps it will come up in another thread), but suffice to say for now that Gitt and Spetner are actually talking about semantic meaning or knowledge, not the mathematical concept of information introduced by Claude Shannon and upon which modern information theory is based.
Speciation occurs when a reproductive boundary arises between previously identical or nearly identical populations of organisms. If you compare the number of nucleotides in the genome of the original species with that in the new species you will find that in come cases it increases, in other cases it decreases, and it might even stay the same. Some genes are the same, some are different, some are new, and some no longer are present.
The important point is that you can't determine whether there's been species change by comparing genomes (though certainly if the genomes are different enough then assuming different species can be a safe assumption).
Thanks for your reply. Do you have any comment or question on the substance of the "kinds" discussion I presented? As I noted, there are numerous problems with the concept, only one of which I enumerated there. Feel free to ask/argue/comment.
As to your question on information gain/loss, I give Percy full marks for his response. The standard Creationist "no new information" argument(s) have even more problems and holes than "kinds" does. This begins with the fundamental conflation of "semantic" vs "algorithmic" vs "structural/attributive" definitions of "information" (enough quotation marks in that sentence for everyone? Good.) This is not, as Percy pointed out, the right thread to get deeply into that particular argument. However, in the context of speciation, I'll just pose to you one question to ponder: Given that speciation is a process that occurs to populations (not individuals), said population consisting of numbers of uniquely varying organisms, how would one go about determining the "information content" of a population in order to decide whether the stochastic changes in the frequency of specific alleles in said population constituted a gain or loss of information?
Interestingly, I also have some disagreement about the entire concept of "macroevolution" as somehow qualitatively different (a different "kind" ) from so-called "microevolution". Taken out of context and a very strict definition, the entire idea of two different processes (because of two different names) is highly erroneous and misleading. Again, a topic for a different thread.
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed awaiting to hear from you.
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:46 PM
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed awaiting to hear from you.
You're outta here Alice
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:45 PM
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed awaiting to hear from you.
You're outta here Alice
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:44 PM
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed awaiting to hear from you.
You're outta here Alice
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:43 PM
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed awaiting to hear from you.
You're outta here Alice
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:42 PM
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed awaiting to hear from you.
You're outta here Alice
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:41 PM
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed awaiting to hear from you.
You're outta here Alice
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:39 PM
This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:40 PM