nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
→Mutations don't lead to evolution? New genetic information?: missed a few words
: When talking about genetic information, we are talking about data ''with meaning''. If you randomly change a sentence, for example, you don't introduce any ''new meaning''; you only corrupt the sentence. There is evidence that the nylon-eating bacteria is not a random change, but something that appears to have been designed for[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1586/].
: When talking about genetic information, we are talking about data ''with meaning''. If you randomly change a sentence, for example, you don't introduce any ''new meaning''; you only corrupt the sentence. There is evidence that the nylon-eating bacteria is not a random change, but something that appears to have been designed for[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1586/].
: The article does not say that beneficial mutations are not produced, only that ones with new information are not produced.
: The article does not say that beneficial mutations are not produced, only that ones with new information are not produced.
: "''Also, bacteria and viruses evolve all the time. They may not meet most people's definition of "evolved", but they are some of the most successful organisms on earth.''": First you assert that it happens, then you admit that it may not be evolution, then you try and justify that it is evolution they are successful! That's a series of non-sequiturs.
: "''Also, bacteria and viruses evolve all the time. They may not meet most people's definition of "evolved", but they are some of the most successful organisms on earth.''": First you assert that it happens, then you admit that it may not be evolution, then you try and justify that it is evolution on the grounds that they are successful! That's a series of non-sequiturs.
: You would accept a quote from AiG? Why do I have my doubts? Nevertheless, you have a point, and although I'll leave the quote in, I'll clarify it.
: You would accept a quote from AiG? Why do I have my doubts? Nevertheless, you have a point, and although I'll leave the quote in, I'll clarify it.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:52, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:52, 26 October 2008 (EDT)