A challenge to Creationists.

[KerrMetric]

Please define "information" in a precise manner that allows you to use it as a metric for information content.

In other words, when you make statements that mutations cannot increase information content I want you to show me mathematically with a precise definition of information that this is so.

Be the first Creationist to ever answer this challenge!

 

[KerrMetric]

Tick tock, tick tock,.......

 

[Micaiah]

As stated elsewhere, if you are unsure of what YEC's mean by information, have a look on the web or look up some books on information theory/biology. This is the standard response we are getting from KerrMetric on questions such as these, so lets see him take a bit of his own medicine. At present I have not had any quibbles over definitions that I'm aware of, so why get bogged down in that argument. We just have a lack of examples that clearly demonstrate an increase in genetic information.

You should be aware that organisations like AIG, and authors such as Spetner do not say that they don't exist so much as they have not been found. They have gone through a number of the popular examples and have taken pains to explain why those examples do not fill the required criteria.

Evolutionists claim that humans evolved from a simple single cell. If evolution does occur, then statistically is is a requirement that nature abound with such mutations. When you think you have found one, then let us know.

So the challenge is there. We await your examples.

 

[random_guy]

As stated elsewhere, if you are unsure of what YEC's mean by information, have a look on the web or look up some books on information theory/biology. This is the standard response we are getting from KerrMetric on questions such as these, so lets see him take a bit of his own medicine. At present I have not had any quibbles over definitions that I'm aware of, so why get bogged down in that argument. We just have a lack of examples that clearly demonstrate an increase in genetic information.

If you define information as stuff needed to code protein, all non-silent mutations change information. Gene duplication is increased information. However, I can not find any biological papers that actually measure information. Instead of going, "It's there", why don't you link a paper with this information. Chances are, information used by Creationists is a made up idea with no scientific backing.

 

[Micaiah]

If you define information as stuff needed to code protein, all non-silent mutations change information. Gene duplication is increased information. However, I can not find any biological papers that actually measure information. Instead of going, "It's there", why don't you link a paper with this information. Chances are, information used by Creationists is a made up idea with no scientific backing.

Question time.

Question 1.
If I take a page of a book and copy the page. Is their a net increase in information?

Question 2.
Would you agree that evolution from the first living cell to humans requires an increase in genetic information?

Question 3.
It has been previously been asserted by KerrMetric that there are examples of genetic mutations that result in an increase in information. How does he know this?

 

[Micaiah]

Okay, have located the type of information you have requested. KerrMetric in responding to your challenge, we need to be sure you have the ability to recognise an adequate definition when it is posted.

The following terms are used when defining the information content of enzymes.

1. Substrate specificity

2. Catalytic activity

3. Specification of the degradation enzyme by amino-acid sequence specificity

4. Binding strength to cell structure

5. Binding to cell structure specificity

I'll procede with further discussion on this matter when you have demonstrated that you are familiar with and understand the connotations of these terms. To that end I'd ask you to provide in your own words and in layman's terms an explanation for each of the above terms.

 

[random_guy]

Question time.

Question 1.
If I take a page of a book and copy the page. Is their a net increase in information?

Yes, because you have twice the amount of information. Now, explain to me, what happens when you duplicate a gene, and then the new gene mutates and new protein to be created, different from the original (polyploid in plants)?

Remember, you still haven't even defined information.

Question 2.
Would you agree that evolution from the first living cell to humans requires an increase in genetic information?

If you mean by my definition, yes.

Question 3.

It has been previously been asserted by KerrMetric that there are examples of genetic mutations that result in an increase in information. How does he know this?

Well, with polyploid plants, they double their chromosome count which allows a new set of genes to mutate. Seems like an increase in information.

Now a question for you. If a amino acid is changed in a protein due to a mutation, is this an increase or decrease of information? Why? What about 2 amino acids being changed? What about if the change doesn't affect the protein? What if it does?

Notice that you have no metric to actually measure information.

 

[Micaiah]

Good to see at least an attempt to answer some questions. I'll be interested to hear KerrMetric's responses.

 

[ebia]

Okay, have located the type of information you have requested. KerrMetric in responding to your challenge, we need to be sure you have the ability to recognise an adequate definition when it is posted.

The following terms are used when defining the information content of enzymes.[snipped]

I'll procede with further discussion on this matter when you have demonstrated that you are familiar with and understand the connotations of these terms. To that end I'd ask you to provide in your own words and in layman's terms an explanation for each of the above terms.

An interesting approach - a science exam before one is allowed to participate in an Origins Thelogy thread. Perhaps one should be mandated for all threads, it would certainly cut down the amount of drivel.

BTW, I trust you can pass your own exam.

 

[Donkeytron]

Okay, have located the type of information you have requested. KerrMetric in responding to your challenge, we need to be sure you have the ability to recognise an adequate definition when it is posted.

The following terms are used when defining the information content of enzymes.

1. Substrate specificity

2. Catalytic activity

3. Specification of the degradation enzyme by amino-acid sequence specificity

4. Binding strength to cell structure

5. Binding to cell structure specificity

I'll procede with further discussion on this matter when you have demonstrated that you are familiar with and understand the connotations of these terms. To that end I'd ask you to provide in your own words and in layman's terms an explanation for each of the above terms.

You've got a degree in biology, right?

 

[justified]

What the heck is a metric? Like metros, as in measurement?

 

[random_guy]

What the heck is a metric? Like metros, as in measurement?

It's a way to measure distance. If something can go up or down, such as information, there must be a mathematical concept called a metric. I gave examples of increased information, now I want to know what the metric is for measuring it. If information theory is applicable to DNA, Critias must show that a metric exists so that we can measure distance.

I have yet to see a good mathematical metric for DNA information. Perhaps Critias knows of one, but until he presents it, he fails KerrMetric's OP.

 

[justified]

And how is this important to creationists? How does a mutatation transfer "information"?

 

[Critias]

It's a way to measure distance. If something can go up or down, such as information, there must be a mathematical concept called a metric. I gave examples of increased information, now I want to know what the metric is for measuring it. If information theory is applicable to DNA, Critias must show that a metric exists so that we can measure distance.

I have yet to see a good mathematical metric for DNA information. Perhaps Critias knows of one, but until he presents it, he fails KerrMetric's OP.

And why must I present evidence of this? I haven't even been involved in this discussion, I am not sure why now I am the one that must present evidence of something that I have never said.

 

[random_guy]

And why must I present evidence of this? I haven't even been involved in this discussion, I am not sure why now I am the one that must present evidence of something that I have never said.

You said that information theory applies to DNA and that mutations don't increase information. In order to apply it, you need a metric. You don't have a metric nor can you present a metric. Basically, your claims that mutations don't increase information fail since you can't back it up.

So sure, you don't have to present evidene. It just makes your argument seem worst.

 

[Critias]

You said that information theory applies to DNA and that mutations don't increase information. In order to apply it, you need a metric. You don't have a metric nor can you present a metric. Basically, your claims that mutations don't increase information fail since you can't back it up.

So sure, you don't have to present evidene. It just makes your argument seem worst.

and where did I say this? I haven't even talked about information theory and how it applies to DNA. I think you got the wrong person.

 

[shernren]

Micaiah: I would advise you not to play with fire. If that sounds condescending, well it probably is, but I would freely admit that I am not fully qualified to answer both your questions and KerrMetric's. But let's give a shot at yours.

1. When a page is photocopied?

Well, for starters it depends on what definition of information you use. From an information-theoretic point of view, there is twice the amount of information since whatever coding system is used twice the amount of bits are required to transmit it. From a human-philosophical point of view, there is the same amount of information, obviously.

Since you have not identified how you wish to measure information, you cannot tell me that I am wrong.

But to take a biological analogy (since it is obvious that you wish to draw inferences to polyploidy speciation) whether or not a polyploidy mutation increases information, it demonstrably changes the biological makeup of the plant which undergoes it, by virtue of the fact that a speciation event occurs. Thus whether or not there has been information change, there has been biological change, and precisely the type evolution needs.

question 2: does evolution require an increase in genetic information? Probably by any definition of genetic information yes. But you will have to show, in turn, that it is impossible for spontaneous events such as mutations to add information to the genome, as well as what exactly you mean by information, if you want to infer that it is impossible for mutations to drive evolution.

Question 3? Nylon bug. Looking at your five criteria for information content in enzymes:

Substrate specificity: the nylon hydrolyzing enzyme shows no activity on homologous substrates. It is specific and represents an increase in information (no enzyme specific to nylon -> an enzyme specific to nylon)

Catalytic activity: AFAIK there are no natural enzymes that act on nylon. So from no catalytic activity -> any amount of catalytic activity represents an information increase.

3, 4, 5: honestly I'm not too sure, both in what you mean (for 3 and 5) and how the nylon bug would fare (for all) For 3 and 5 can you describe examples - what would a protein with low info content under 3 look like, and high info content? Ditto 5? I'm guessing the nylon bug will still count as an increase.

 

[Micaiah]

I am looking for general definitions of the terms mentioned. Thanks for your attempt anyhow. As you may appreciate this is but the tip of the iceberg. We haven't started on the mathematics yet. This was really directed at KerrMetric. I am looking for a response in his own words or an admission that even if I was able to provide a mathematic method for measuring information gain or loss it would be meaningless to him and most other people on this forum.

 

[elijah115]

interesting read, how did the first inanimate-to-living-thing transformation occur anyway?

 

[Micaiah]

From what I can gather the general consensus on both sides of the debate is that there is a thick shroud of mystery that hangs over this question.