[debunked] Can new information be added to DNA?

In situ

in vivo veritas
May 20, 2013
1,754
324
Amsterdam
✟15,712.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Based on discussion in another thread I want to make a separate post just to debunk the nonsense that "no new information can be added to DNA".

What matters in biology is structure, this because structure defines function. In other word it is all about chemistry - not information theory. Now it so happen that in chemistry physical structures causes a chemical reaction from one type of molecules to another. As such, when the structure (read: encoding) cause a reaction (read: mapping) it can be viewed as "information" processing, but what we really talk about when we say "information" is chemical reactions dependent or caused by a structure, i.e "information" in this case is actually "chemical reactions".

Knowing this, we can translate what YEC says into what it really means:
  • can new chemical reactions be added to DNA?
  • new chemical reactions cannot be created
  • it is impossible to add new chemical reactions
  • what new chemical reactions have been added?
  • you can only lose chemical reactions
  • etc, etc....

Is this true? No it isn't.... it is complete nonsense in combination with utter ignorance!

As usually it is a matter of semantic confusion. The fact that YEC does not have any evidence to bring to the table, in combination with poor scientific knowledge AND a desperation to find any evidence makes them look under every single stone the can find for anything they perceived as a conflict with the theory of evolution. By conflating two different and unrelated field based on words similarities they mange to find "proofs" that evolution is "impossible". But these "poofs" is always based on ignorance and word games on their own part.

Ignorance has never stopped anyone from doing anything...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ophiolite

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Based on discussion in another thread I want to make a separate post just to debunk the nonsense that "no new information can be added to DNA".
What matters in biology is structure, this because structure defines function. In other word it is all about chemistry - not information theory. Now it so happen that in chemistry physical structures causes a chemical reaction from one type of molecules to another. As such, when the structure (read: encoding) cause a reaction (read: mapping) it can be viewed as "information" processing, but what we really talk about when we say "information" is chemical reactions dependent or caused by a structure, i.e "information" in this case is actually "chemical reactions".
Knowing this, we can translate what YEC says into what it really means:
  • can new chemical reactions be added to DNA?
  • new chemical reactions cannot be created
  • it is impossible to add new chemical reactions
  • what new chemical reactions have been added?
  • you can only lose chemical reactions
  • etc, etc....
Is this true? No it isn't.... it is complete nonsense in combination with utter ignorance!
As usually it is a matter of semantic confusion. The fact that YEC does not have any evidence to bring to the table, in combination with poor scientific knowledge AND a desperation to find any evidence makes them look under every single stone the can find for anything they perceived as a conflict with the theory of evolution. By conflating two different and unrelated field based on words similarities they mange to find "proofs" that evolution is "impossible". But these "poofs" is always based on ignorance and word games on their own part.Ignorance has never stopped anyone from doing anything...

That's a lot of chatter with no citations or support for a claim.
I'll give you a head start:
3.8 MILLION Articles
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
32,800
36,094
Los Angeles Area
✟820,226.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
That's a lot of chatter with no citations or support for a claim.
I'll give you a head start:
3.8 MILLION Articles
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/

If it's true that "information" is equivalent (to the antievolutionist) to "biochemical reactions" then we know that new biochemical reactions have evolved.

"There is scientific consensus that the capacity to synthesize nylonase most probably developed as a single-step mutation that survived because it improved the fitness of the bacteria possessing the mutation. More importantly: The enzyme involved has been produced by a mutation completely randomizing the original gene. Despite this, the new gene still had a novel, albeit weak, catalytic capacity. This is seen as a good example of how mutations easily can provide the raw material for evolution by natural selection"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ophiolite
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
That's a lot of chatter with no citations or support for a claim.
I'll give you a head start:
3.8 MILLION Articles
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
-_- Fragile X syndrome, as in this source:
"Nearly all cases of fragile X syndrome are caused by a mutation in which a DNA segment, known as the CGG triplet repeat, is expanded within the FMR1 gene. Normally, this DNA segment is repeated from 5 to about 40 times. In people with fragile X syndrome, however, the CGG segment is repeated more than 200 times."
Which is in the second paragraph under Which genes are related to fragile X syndrome?
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/fragile-x-syndrome
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
-_- Fragile X syndrome, as in this source:
"Nearly all cases of fragile X syndrome are caused by a mutation in which a DNA segment, known as the CGG triplet repeat, is expanded within the FMR1 gene. Normally, this DNA segment is repeated from 5 to about 40 times. In people with fragile X syndrome, however, the CGG segment is repeated more than 200 times."
Which is in the second paragraph under Which genes are related to fragile X syndrome?
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/fragile-x-syndrome

The word "information" is used quite a bit in that article.
Each use debunking the claim. Got milk?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/


"You might also find information on the diagnosis or management of fragile X syndrome inEducational resources and Patient support.General information about the diagnosis and management of genetic conditions is available in the Handbook. Read more about genetic testing, particularly the difference between clinical tests and research tests.
To locate a healthcare provider, see How can I find a genetics professional in my area? in the Handbook.
MedlinePlus - Health information (2 links)

You may also be interested in these resources, which are designed for healthcare professionals and researchers.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Normally, this DNA segment is repeated from 5 to about 40 times. In people with fragile X syndrome, however, the CGG segment is repeated more than 200 times."

So this new information should be filed with the library of congress?

vector-of-a-frusterated-cartoon-girl-trying-to-use-a-complicated-copier-machine-by-ron-leishman-43284.jpg
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
So this new information should be filed with the library of congress?
I gave you exactly what you wanted: evidence that DNA can be added on to.

Also, every use of information that you brought up previously was the site directing those interested in more research on the topic to other sources, and wasn't a part of the main topic's content.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ophiolite
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I gave you exactly what you wanted: evidence that DNA can be added on to.Also, every use of information that you brought up previously was the site directing those interested in more research on the topic to other sources, and wasn't a part of the main topic's content.

Please use the quote function when disputing "exactly what you wanted:"
because they didn't consider it new information at all.
Or even old information. DNA is considered the building blocks of life.
It is well engineered. Just piling up blocks blindly is not new information.

31019
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,677
7,744
64
Massachusetts
✟339,443.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It is well engineered. Just piling up blocks blindly is not new information.
Then you'd better tell us what information is. Anything that can be in multiple states can be treated as information, so I have no problem with treating the sequence of DNA as information (and have done so professionally once or twice). In that sense, new information is added to DNA all the time. But that isn't what you mean, so you'd better offer your own definition.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Please use the quote function when disputing "exactly what you wanted:"
because they didn't consider it new information at all.
Or even old information. DNA is considered the building blocks of life.
It is well engineered. Just piling up blocks blindly is not new information.
Define information so I can provide an adequate example of additions to DNA sequences you won't completely disregard. Also, clearly, the additions related to Fragile X syndrome have a phenotypic effect, so don't act like this addition does nothing. Furthermore, seeing as mutations are pretty much random, what effect they have (or if they have none) doesn't make the "piling up of blocks" any more or less "blindly done".
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,141
Visit site
✟98,005.00
Faith
Agnostic
That's a lot of chatter with no citations or support for a claim.
I'll give you a head start:
3.8 MILLION Articles
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/

Linking 3.8 million articles that you don't understand really isn't helpful.

At the end of the day, mutations filtered through natural selection is what is responsible for the biodiversity we see today. If you don't count the end result of this process as new information, then evolution doesn't need to produce new information as you define it. You have argued yourself out of the conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

And-U-Say

Veteran
Oct 11, 2004
1,764
152
California
✟19,565.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Divorced
Based on discussion in another thread I want to make a separate post just to debunk the nonsense that "no new information can be added to DNA".

What matters in biology is structure, this because structure defines function. In other word it is all about chemistry - not information theory. Now it so happen that in chemistry physical structures causes a chemical reaction from one type of molecules to another. As such, when the structure (read: encoding) cause a reaction (read: mapping) it can be viewed as "information" processing, but what we really talk about when we say "information" is chemical reactions dependent or caused by a structure, i.e "information" in this case is actually "chemical reactions".

Knowing this, we can translate what YEC says into what it really means:
  • can new chemical reactions be added to DNA?
  • new chemical reactions cannot be created
  • it is impossible to add new chemical reactions
  • what new chemical reactions have been added?
  • you can only lose chemical reactions
  • etc, etc....

Is this true? No it isn't.... it is complete nonsense in combination with utter ignorance!

As usually it is a matter of semantic confusion. The fact that YEC does not have any evidence to bring to the table, in combination with poor scientific knowledge AND a desperation to find any evidence makes them look under every single stone the can find for anything they perceived as a conflict with the theory of evolution. By conflating two different and unrelated field based on words similarities they mange to find "proofs" that evolution is "impossible". But these "poofs" is always based on ignorance and word games on their own part.

Ignorance has never stopped anyone from doing anything...
When we understand that there is no information in DNA (as is implied here), then we can see that this mythical information barrier doesn't even apply to DNA.
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,677
7,744
64
Massachusetts
✟339,443.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,141
Visit site
✟98,005.00
Faith
Agnostic

Too bad they don't overtly define the term "information". However, this seems like a good working definition:

"What do a human, a rose, and a bacterium have in common? Each of these things — along with every other organism on Earth — contains the molecular instructions for life, called deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA. Encoded within this DNA are the directions for traits as diverse as the color of a person's eyes, the scent of a rose, and the way in which bacteria infect a lung cell."

Information, as they seem to define it, is the DNA sequence giving rise to phenotypes, be it physical traits or even as simple as RNA transcripts. Can you get new phenotypes through mutation and natural selection? Yep, you sure can.

So by the definition given here, it would seem quite simple for evolution to produce new information.
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,677
7,744
64
Massachusetts
✟339,443.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Too bad they don't overtly define the term "information". However, this seems like a good working definition:

"What do a human, a rose, and a bacterium have in common? Each of these things — along with every other organism on Earth — contains the molecular instructions for life, called deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA. Encoded within this DNA are the directions for traits as diverse as the color of a person's eyes, the scent of a rose, and the way in which bacteria infect a lung cell."

Information, as they seem to define it, is the DNA sequence giving rise to phenotypes, be it physical traits or even as simple as RNA transcripts. Can you get new phenotypes through mutation and natural selection? Yep, you sure can.

So by the definition given here, it would seem quite simple for evolution to produce new information.
Absolutely. By ordinary definitions of "information", it's easily added to DNA by natural processes. If someone claims otherwise, they'd better tell us what definition they're using.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Absolutely. By ordinary definitions of "information", it's easily added to DNA by natural processes. If someone claims otherwise, they'd better tell us what definition they're using.

Which article covers that?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums