Evolution of de novo genes; a further nail in the coffin of intelligent design?

[Oncedeceived]

Sorry, there's nothing like that in the theory of evolution. You must be talking about some other theory.

DNA is not part of the theory of evolution?

Why?[/QUOTE]The code needs to be present prior to any process of evolution.

 

[Speedwell]

DNA is not part of the theory of evolution?

Yes. DNA is a molecule, not a " "language/code, the message, and the goal."
Those are analogies use in children's books about evolution.

The code needs to be present prior to any process of evolution.

The "code" (My goodness! Where do creationists get this nonsense?) or the information required to produce the next generation of the species along with randomly distributed variation resides in the population's gene pool.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

How does evolution generate coded information when information is not matter or energy?

The information in a system lies in the arrangement of its elements - change the arrangement and you change the information. Whether a given arrangement is 'code' depends on the systems that interact with it.

 

[Oncedeceived]

No, you're right, it isn't. "Information" is a mathematical way of characterizing patterns of physical objects. What you are asking is is basically the same as "how do chemical reactions form patterns of molecules?"

No, I am not asking "how do chemical reactions form patterns of molecules. Patterns do not convey information. Codes however do. WE may think of information in a mathematical way of characterizing patterns in physical objects but our way of thinking has no factor on the actual information contained in those physical objects.

 

[Speedwell]

No, I am not asking "how do chemical reactions form patterns of molecules.

Patterns are information.

Patterns do not convey information.

Patterns are information.

Code however do. WE may think of information in a mathematical way of characterizing patterns in physical objects but our way of thinking has no factor on the actual information contained in those physical objects.

"Actual information?" Where are you getting this stuff?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Yes. DNA is a molecule, not a " "language/code, the message, and the goal."
Those are analogies use in children's books about evolution.

Really?
“Information, transcription, translation, code, redundancy, synonymous, messenger, editing, and proofreading are all appropriate terms in biology. They take their meaning from information theory (Shannon, 1948) and are not synonyms, metaphors, or analogies.” (Hubert P. Yockey, Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, Cambridge University Press, 2005)

The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism (goal), similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences. (language)
What is DNA?

The "code" (My goodness! Where do creationists get this nonsense?) or the information required to produce the next generation of the species along with randomly distributed variation resides in the population's gene pool.

That is a rather biased label. As you can read above the term code is used in advanced Biology as well as research papers.

The genetic code is the set of rules by which information encoded in genetic material (DNA or RNA sequences) is translated into proteins (amino acid sequences) by living cells.

Specifically, the code defines a mapping between tri-nucleotide sequences called codons and amino acids; every triplet of nucleotides in a nucleic acid sequence specifies a single amino acid.

Because the vast majority of genes are encoded with exactly the same code, this particular code is often referred to as the canonical or standard genetic code, or simply the genetic code, though in fact there are many variant codes; thus, the canonical genetic code is not universal.
Genetic code
None of the links I've provided are from 'creationists'.

 

[Oncedeceived]

The information in a system lies in the arrangement of its elements - change the arrangement and you change the information. Whether a given arrangement is 'code' depends on the systems that interact with it.

The arrangement comes from the code. The arrangement provides instruction.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Patterns are information.Patterns are information."Actual information?" Where are you getting this stuff?

Patterns are not the information, they are the result of the information.

 

[Tinker Grey]

DNA isn't coded for "blue" eyes any more than snow is coded to make roads icy.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Patterns are information.Patterns are information."Actual information?" Where are you getting this stuff?

How are patterns information? What pattern can you demonstrate conveys information?

 

[Oncedeceived]

DNA isn't coded for "blue" eyes any more than snow is coded to make roads icy.

You are claiming that DNA's code doesn't instruct for eye color?

 

[Tinker Grey]

You are claiming that DNA's code doesn't instruct for eye color?

Are you claiming snow is coded to makes roads icy?

 

[Oncedeceived]

The information in a system lies in the arrangement of its elements - change the arrangement and you change the information. Whether a given arrangement is 'code' depends on the systems that interact with it.

The elements are just symbols or letters they themselves do not hold information, the information informs what arrangement those letters will be in to convey a message.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Are you claiming snow is coded to makes roads icy?

I am not claiming snow is coded to make roads icy. I ask again, are you claiming that DNA does not encode for eye color?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The arrangement comes from the code.

Only in the small subset of cases where there is (to keep it simple) intent to communicate. In the vast majority of cases, the arrangement isn't a code. For example, the arrangement of water on the ground can give you information about whether it rained recently, and how much rain fell, but it's not a code.

The evolutionary information of DNA is an interesting half-way house where the effects of random modifications of existing information are tested against the environment.

The arrangement provides instruction.

That's up to the interpreter of the information. A recipe in Mandarin is instructive only to Mandarin readers.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The elements are just symbols or letters they themselves do not hold information, the information informs what arrangement those letters will be in to convey a message.

Symbols or letters are information. Their arrangements are also information. Their utility is contingent on an interpreter; their meaning is contingent on human interpretation; i.e. meaning is a human concept that we impose or project onto the world of our experience.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Patterns are not the information, they are the result of the information.

What information results in the pattern of a snowflake?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Only in the small subset of cases where there is (to keep it simple) intent to communicate. In the vast majority of cases, the arrangement isn't a code. For example, the arrangement of water on the ground can give you information about whether it rained recently, and how much rain fell, but it's not a code.

The evolutionary information of DNA is an interesting half-way house where the effects of random modifications of existing information are tested against the environment.

What you are using as an example is not a code, whereas DNA information is a code. The arrangement of water doesn't matter, the receiver (us) makes a determination on whether it rained or a sprinkler was left on and how much water may be on the ground. There is no coded information associated with that. Its arbitrary whereas the code of DNA has specific purpose, and is independent of the communication medium. The term code for DNA in the field of Biology has been almost universal since the 60's.

That's up to the interpreter of the information. A recipe in Mandarin is instructive only to Mandarin readers.

Code is defined as the rules of communication between an encoder (a “writer” or “speaker”) and a decoder (a “reader” or “listener”) using agreed upon symbols. It doesn't matter if we as humans can read DNA's code, it works without our interpretation. Yet, we can now read it because we know its language.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Symbols or letters are information. Their arrangements are also information. Their utility is contingent on an interpreter; their meaning is contingent on human interpretation; i.e. meaning is a human concept that we impose or project onto the world of our experience.

That isn't the case, the letters for the words that form the sentences that provide the instructions to act upon. The arrangements come from the information to form the arrangement. I don't know what you mean by your last statement would you mind clarifying it a bit?

 

[Oncedeceived]

What information results in the pattern of a snowflake?

I give up...what?