Intelligent Design in Biology

Originally posted by RJHinds
That is only duplication of OLD information code not new information code that has a beneficial effect. Down Syndrome has not been considered a benefit to my knowledge and in any event the duplicate information code is not "NEW".

Adding an extra chromosome is new information now matter how you look at it.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Adding an extra chromosome is new information now matter how you look at it.

Yes, good point. And if that extra chromosome then eventually mutates, which it would inevitable do so given sufficient time, and so becomes different from the other copy in that same genome then it is even harder to deny that that combination of chromosome duplication followed by one of the two chromosome copies mutating to become different from the other must provide “new information”.


RJHinds:

this is yet another undeniable proof to add to the undeniable proof I gave in my last post which you have not yet had a chance to respond to.
Well?
How does these two proofs NOT prove that a mutation can add “new information”?
-you can start with explaining how my proof in my previous post is NOT proof ....

Originally posted by humy

but from this definiton, it appears to me that the lost information is restored back to the way it was originally. So the net gain of information code is ZERO.

-which is totally irrelevant to what I posted!
Didn't you actually read my post?
OF COURSE any “lost information” is restored back to the way it was IF the mutation reverses!
But w ...[text shortened]... r...

So how on earth does this NOT prove that a mutation can add “new information”?
Well?

It is only conjecture that a mutation brought back the information. Remember this occurs do to the reproduction process. The lost information is probably attained from the other mate and not from another mutation in reverse. I would say the scientist are logically wrong on the idea that what they call a "reverse mutation" is really a mutation at all.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Adding an extra chromosome is new information now matter how you look at it.

It is additional information, but not "new" information. It is a error that has duplicated part or all of a chromosome and there is nothing "new" about it. In fact, it causes harm to the individual which is contrary to the evolutionary theory of evolving to a higher life form on the tree of evolution.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is additional information, but not "new" information. It is a error that has duplicated part or all of a chromosome and there is nothing "new" about it. In fact, it causes harm to the individual which is contrary to the evolutionary theory of evolving to a higher life form on the tree of evolution.

Most mutations are not good for the life form in question, so what. There are trillions of life forms and mutations going on at a furious rate, besides cross trading genes in bacteria, gene swapping without reproduction. That should throw a monkey wrench in your creationist stance.

Originally posted by humy
Yes, good point. And if that extra chromosome then eventually mutates, which it would inevitable do so given sufficient time, and so becomes different from the other copy in that same genome then it is even harder to deny that that combination of chromosome duplication followed by one of the two chromosome copies mutating to become different from the other must ...[text shortened]... information”?
-you can start with explaining how my proof in my previous post is NOT proof ....

Your mind is so indroctrinated to believe in evolution that you are like the Jehovah's Witnesses that can not be reasoned with when anything contrary to what they are told by the Watchtower is presented to them. I doubt if anything could convice you, if you have watched all the videos and gave your close attention to what was presented. The problem with the JWs is they refuse to watch any of the videos exposing the Watchtower's false teachings, which makes it even harder to get through to a real committed JW. In my opinion, you are just as committed to a belief in evolution as I am in the belief in Christ, my Lord and Savior. So at this point, it seems futile for me to try to convince you of your wrong thinking, becasue you have no respect for my intelligence and knowledged about this subject and don't seem to be interested in the views of those biological scientist who have opposite views from you.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is only conjecture that a mutation brought back the information. Remember this occurs do to the reproduction process. The lost information is probably attained from the other mate and not from another mutation in reverse. I would say the scientist are logically wrong on the idea that what they call a "reverse mutation" is really a mutation at all.

Remember this occurs do to the reproduction process. The lost information is PROBABLY attained from the other mate and not from another mutation in reverse. (my emphasis)

a totally unsubstantiated assertion made by a proven moron and from a position of complete ignorance of science and this research. Given your total ignorance of the subject you have repeatedly demonstrated, HOW do you know this is “ PROBABLY” so? Answer, you don't and you know it.

What about the revertible mutations observed in bacteria?
How is this occurs do to with “the reproduction process“ and information “attained from the other mate” as you said?
Baceria do NOT reproduce sexually. So you are Just talking complete crap and you know it.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/n4l77r6h77064172/
“...numerous cases of reversible switches now known in a wide range of bacteria serving a variety of functions. ...” ( reversible switches here are a type of reversible mutation )

http://www.esp.org/foundations/genetics/classical/holdings/l/slmd-43.pdf
“...This is particularly true of cases
where the mutation rate is high and where reverse mutation occurs....”
“...Since [genetic] mutation is usually reversible, the bacterial [variations] are likewise reversible in most cases. ...”

well?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Your mind is so indroctrinated to believe in evolution that you are like the Jehovah's Witnesses that can not be reasoned with when anything contrary to what they are told by the Watchtower is presented to them. I doubt if anything could convice you, if you have watched all the videos and gave your close attention to what was presented. The problem with th ...[text shortened]... to be interested in the views of those biological scientist who have opposite views from you.

Indoctrinated is a word to use about theists. Educated is the word for the rest of us who believe in actual reality and the wonders therein, not some man made religion whose express purpose is to grow its organization, demean women, and control men.
To think a god would inspire just a few men to write glorious words is ludicrous on the face of it.

A real god would more likely not have any interaction with us at all since it would have already known at the beginning of the universe exactly how everything about us, the planet Earth, the Solar system, and the rest of the universe, how everything will happen. So there would be no need for a god to stick its metaphorical fingers into our affairs.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Your mind is so indroctrinated to believe in evolution that you are like the Jehovah's Witnesses that can not be reasoned with when anything contrary to what they are told by the Watchtower is presented to them. I doubt if anything could convice you, if you have watched all the videos and gave your close attention to what was presented. The problem with th to be interested in the views of those biological scientist who have opposite views from you.

so you don't even attempt to give a counterargument now because you have absolutely no counterargument and you clearly know it -so you just give the usual irrelevant crap instead -just try and change the subject in the hope we would notice you have been proven totally wrong.

You have been given not one but two irrefutable absolute proofs that you are totally wrong and you still so stupid and arrogant as not admit you are wrong.

We have irrefutably proved at least twice now that mutations can and sometimes do add new information no matter how you look at it.
Yet you still don't admit when you are clearly wrong and you just troll.
That must say a lot about your character.

Originally posted by humy

Remember this occurs do to the reproduction process. The lost information is PROBABLY attained from the other mate and not from another mutation in reverse. (my emphasis)

a totally unsubstantiated assertion made by a proven moron and from a position of complete ignorance of science and this research. Given your total ignorance of the subjec ...[text shortened]... lly reversible, the bacterial [variations] are likewise reversible in most cases. ...”

well?

Well, God has probability put a self-correcting program in the bacteria so that it works in the reproduction process to correct any mutation.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Indoctrinated is a word to use about theists. Educated is the word for the rest of us who believe in actual reality and the wonders therein, not some man made religion whose express purpose is to grow its organization, demean women, and control men.
To think a god would inspire just a few men to write glorious words is ludicrous on the face of it.

A re ...[text shortened]... happen. So there would be no need for a god to stick its metaphorical fingers into our affairs.

Speculation and opinion is not science, is it?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well, God has probability put a self-correcting program in the bacteria so that it works in the reproduction process to correct any mutation.

That would still mean mutations can and DO sometimes add now information even if that total absurdity that 'God' arranged it was true -sorry, you have lost the argument.

Originally posted by humy
so you don't even attempt to give a counterargument now because you have absolutely no counterargument and you clearly know it -so you just give the usual irrelevant crap instead -just try and change the subject in the hope we would notice you have been proven totally wrong.

You have been given not one but two irrefutable absolute proofs that you are totally ...[text shortened]... dmit when you are clearly wrong and you just troll.
That must say a lot about your character.

I do not see mutations ss proof of anything other that errors can occuring in the decoding and exchange of information process. It certainly does not prove evolution and seems to disprove evolution from my point of view. But you don't have to listen to a ignorant moron. But it seems you would at least listen to reputable scientists who think differently from you.

Originally posted by humy
That would still mean mutations can and DO sometimes add now information even if that total absurdity that 'God' arranged it was true -sorry, you have lost the argument.

I don't think you understand the meaning of "new" information. Maybe, you should have listened to some of those scientist on the videos to find out.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I do not see mutations ss proof of anything other that errors can occuring in the decoding and exchange of information process. It certainly does not prove evolution and seems to disprove evolution from my point of view. But you don't have to listen to a ignorant moron. But it seems you would at least listen to reputable scientists who think differently from you.

Yes, you gave that crap before.

But it seems you would at least listen to reputable scientists who think differently from you.

they don't exist when I am stating what science proved just as I am now. Why don't you listen to reputable scientists who think differently from you? You are just talking crap as usual.


So what is your counterargument to our two absolute proofs that mutations can and sometimes do add new information no matter how you look at it ? -still waiting....
You have clearly lost the argument here.