Not a lot of time, just a couple of small quick points.
But was there new information given to the fish to secure its survival? The answer of course is no.
Actually, the answer is yes. The creationist may feel that the new information that caused the sealing of the eyelids is a "loss" of information in that the fish lost its sight, but, the eye is still there and additional proteins are necessary to cause the eyelids to be sealed...new information. In actuality what happens in these cases is not that the eyelids seal shut, but, that when mutations occur that blind the individual, since the eye is useless in the environment anyway, the survival and reproductive imperative is not altered, the blindness is passed on to offspring which survive and reproduce just fine.
A faux pas could have been made that gave you an odd combination or a missing piece that made you not like anyone else, possibly in a way that makes you stronger in specific areas... But none of the information that is given to you upon birth can be contributed to any outside factor other than your parental units.
There are plenty of vectors that increase genetic materials: new gene space usage, transcription error in meiosis, viral transfer, symbiotic gene transfer, and other dozens of known vectors that increase the total number of nucleotide space available for new capabilities to be expressed. The creationist contention that
The SUPERcell required to start all of life must have had every possible DNA combination stored inside of it in order to branch out into all of the different living things we see today; plants and animals included.
is bogus. Any simple research, Google search, and time spent reading and studying the processes of what evolution
really says should be enough to show that these creationist views are without foundation.
™ Version 4.2