Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Question on genetic information
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 10 of 32 (373628)
01-02-2007 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by AZPaul3
01-01-2007 12:21 PM


... 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.
The sealed eye is also protected from infection and parasites. Less infection or fewer parasites = increased survival.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AZPaul3, posted 01-01-2007 12:21 PM AZPaul3 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 11 of 32 (373631)
01-02-2007 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Arithus
12-30-2006 1:04 AM


Welcome to the fray Arithus.
I had recently read:
"Information does not have to be increased for the mutation to be beneficial. It has to be increased for the theory of evolution to be plausible."
I have yet to study anything in genetics and I was wondering, if those of you who know genetics could clarify these statement and tell me wether they are true or if it is all just another creationist misunderstanding.
The other standard creationist or IDist claim is that information is not created by mutations it is just rearranged from previously existing information.
This too is bogus for a couple of reasons. First there is no definition of "information" given, second there is no metric for measuring the quantity of "information" present before and after, and third, information is in the arrangement.
If you look at any method used for conveying information, the information is NOT in the alphabet or binary code used, it is in the arrangement of them: rearranging can and does provide new information.
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;
Not necessary, because rearrangement can create new combinations. Seeing as there is NO evidence of a past "SUPERcell" (the first life known is a simple cyanobacteria) this is just another ad hoc invention made to support a false concept.
{abe}One could say that this conclusion thus shows that the whole argument is false, because there is absolutely no evidence for such a "SUPERcell" to have existed or for this division of pre-existing stored DNA information to currently exist and play a role in the continuing evolution we see today.{/abe}
Enjoy.

ps type [qs]quote boxes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quote boxes are easy
and thanks for "fieldset"
Edited by RAZD, : abe - added by edit

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Arithus, posted 12-30-2006 1:04 AM Arithus has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 17 of 32 (373864)
01-02-2007 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Percy
01-02-2007 10:05 AM


Re: macro and genetic information
This year's Nobel prize in biology was for research into gene regulation and expression, and when I read your post I wondered if perhaps the snake's loss of legs was due to regulatory changes rather than to loss of actual genes.
Doesn't this just shift the issue of {gain\loss} to the gene regulatory part of the DNA?
This would be similar to the {off\on\off\on} expression of wings in the walkingstick insects.
Thanks.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Percy, posted 01-02-2007 10:05 AM Percy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024