nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 58:
Line 58: + +
Talk:Point mutation (view source)
Revision as of 07:44, February 14, 2009
, 07:44, February 14, 2009→Genetic information (continued): Add a bit bout Behe and rare trivial information-gaining mutations.
For microbe-to-man evolution to have occurred, a ''huge'' amount of new information would have had to be generated. So supplying a handful of questionable examples, which is all that has been offered so far, hardly solves the problem. And when Richard Dawkins was interviewed for a video, he was unable to supply ''any'' examples of new genetic information arising in nature.
For microbe-to-man evolution to have occurred, a ''huge'' amount of new information would have had to be generated. So supplying a handful of questionable examples, which is all that has been offered so far, hardly solves the problem. And when Richard Dawkins was interviewed for a video, he was unable to supply ''any'' examples of new genetic information arising in nature.
Indeed, a creationary biologist has told me that he doesn't totally rule out the possibility of the extremely rare trivial information-gaining mutation. I've seen this alluded to in creationary literature, although I'm not sure that I've ever seen it said explicitly. However, I gather that Michael Behe's ''The Edge of evolution'' (which I haven't read) covers this point. See [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6207/#txtRef19 here] for a mini-review of Behe's book.
John Sanford (''Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome''), writing mainly about human evolution, points out that a few examples wouldn't solve the problem anyway.
John Sanford (''Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome''), writing mainly about human evolution, points out that a few examples wouldn't solve the problem anyway.