- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by Anonymous.
May 4, 2005 at 7:57 pm #1046AnonymousInactive
This thread is intended to be about MUTATIONS in specific. Which is only part of Evolution. Here is a post from another forum that will hopefully spark some interest on mutations.
[quote:mpdntl88] I think that the term “positive mutation” or “beneficial mutation” is really a misnomer. Who or what determines whether a mutation is “beneficial”? A mutation may be beneficial to one thing and detrimental to another.
I have no problem accepting something that could be an undeniable “beneficial mutation.” My real question is this: When mutations occur, whether beneficial or detrimental, is any new genetic information added to the genome? I don’t mean: “are any new genes added?” I mean: “is there any new information added that did not previously exist, or is merely a scrambling of existing information, or a duplication of existing information?”
For example: a gene pool has the blueprints for constructing an organism with code units A,B,C,D, and E, and can produce sequences of each unit up to four consecutively. Under normal circumstances, A directly follows all terminal D’s (Note: This is not actual biogenetics, this is just an illustration).
Let’s say one organism defined by this blueprint has the following code:
This organism could have undergone a mutation, because it lacks any instance of unit E found in the blueprint. This is a loss of information.
Another organism has the following code:
This organism could have undergone a mutation, because the presence of a C after the D didn’t follow the blueprint. It is a gain of additional code from the existing gene pool, yet still there is no new information.
Since this gene pool (blueprint) does not have the information to produce an F, no organism from this gene pool will ever carry an F. However, many possibilities (with definite limitations) are possible to produce some very strange mutations. Whether beneficial or detrimental, I don’t believe that mutations can add new information not already present in some form in the blueprint.
If new information can be added, it would take existing information to produce this new information. Being a Computer Scientist and programmer, I find it hard to believe that new information could possibly arise from non-information. An attempt to prove otherwise results in circular arguments.
The development of a program:
1. We observe that a certain computer program exists. How did it get here?
2. A human could have possibly written it using a certain other program called a compiler, which translated human-readable source code into binarycode that is read by another program, an operating system, running on the architecture.
3. Ah, but this particular binary instance may not have been originally compiled by a human. It could have been a copy from another instance.
4. Ok, so where did the original program from which all these arbitrary copies come from? A human or a machine?
5. It doesn’t matter. The original program could have actually been generated from the running of another program, which itself was compiled.
6. Compiled in what language? C?
7. Yeah, so where did the C compiler come from?
8. It could have come from another C program. Many C compilers are written in C.
9. Ok, but the original compiler could not have been written in C, because that would be circular reasoning.
10. Of course, it was probably written in assembly. Which can cyclically be traced back to an original machine language program, precursor to the invention of “high-level languages.”
11. Ah, so there is the beginning of all the information required to create this final program. Machine language, right?
12. Wrong. The information for the machine architecture is blueprinted in the circuitry — designed by humans. The machine instructions that operate this circuitry was also designed by humans. The information to produce this program, or the program that produced this program, or the architecture that started it all arose from previously existing information (from the minds of humans), who are outside of and supercede the information by which the computer and its programs operate.
13. So where did this information come from? Since information begets information, and without information no information can be produced, where did the initial information come from. It would have to be something that supercedes the nature of information-bearing components itself. You figure out what or Who that is.[/quote:mpdntl88]May 4, 2005 at 7:59 pm #4387AnonymousInactive
So the question is:
How is evolution possible if NEW information is needed at some point in the evolutionary process?
Let me know your thoughts.
~VictorMay 5, 2005 at 5:36 am #4390
Couldn’t environment changes be considered new information?May 5, 2005 at 5:26 pm #4392AnonymousInactive
That is new information but the new information must come from within the DNA. How does the enviroment change cause a new amino acid to magically appear?
That is called a miracle. ” title=”Wink” />
My math professor once told me that if an atom takes 10 to the power 15 (10,000,000,000,000,000) chances to combine with another atom that it is considered a miracle. He said there was an actual Mathematical term for this. But I don’t remember it. ” title=”Sad” />
~VictorMay 9, 2005 at 7:26 am #4421
[quote:16r2bbbz]That is new information but the new information must come from within the DNA. How does the enviroment change cause a new amino acid to magically appear?[/quote:16r2bbbz]
I’m not doubting that it is a miracle, but these changes from within probably require some sort of input.
So say that climate conditions change and only certain types of food are available. Eventually the body would adapt to be able to produce the enzymes necessary to break down that food.May 9, 2005 at 3:47 pm #4437AnonymousInactive
[quote:3r92miyw]I’m not doubting that it is a miracle, but these changes from within probably require some sort of input.[/quote:3r92miyw]
Ya I know you weren’t. The norm for mutations we see now is that external factors are the input that can affect a change from within. The cause is the reconfiguration of the amino acids which may or not bring about a new species. This is not where I get stuck or struggle with.
[quote:3r92miyw]So say that climate conditions change and only certain types of food are available. Eventually the body would adapt to be able to produce the enzymes necessary to break down that food.[/quote:3r92miyw]
That’s my point. The necessary enzymes, amino acids, proteins, etc. cannot be produced, due to lack of certain atoms that are not part of the organism. Only 3 things can happen:
1. Wait for millions of years for the RIGHT atoms to attach to it.
2. It will die.
3. God creates the necessary input.
~VictorMay 9, 2005 at 6:47 pm #4445
So basically you are just trying to say that mutations or evolution cannot happen with out God, right? Is that what you are getting at?May 9, 2005 at 7:10 pm #4447AnonymousInactive
You got it. ” title=”Wink” />
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.