How mutation adds information to a population genome

[Starise]

I don't believe men actually come from apes.

If we went the first three from the right....this would be pretty accurate.

[ayin jade]

23 hours ago, nobody said:

I've learn to trust what Jesus says, The Father and the Son, Holy Spirit has created all things. and is in need of nothing. Let me ask you something is jealous a fruit of the Spirit.

So if your words contradict the bible, then are you saying that your experience trumps scripture?

[nobody]

13 minutes ago, ayin jade said:

So if your words contradict the bible, then are you saying that your experience trumps scripture?

lol where in your bible explains who, created the gods, and who gave forethought to god to blow on Adam and what happen, why didn't he blow on eve that, should get you, and was it really a serpent, What did man record and spiritual whats really  happened. Your going to have a hard time when John begins and finishes.

[Heleadethme]

In Genesis, it is written that "God said let the waters bring forth...." and "the waters brought forth.....".  And also "God said let the earth bring forth...." and "the earth brought forth.....". 

Just wanted to point that out.   That doesn't seem incompatible with a concept in principle of evolutionary development.

[The Barbarian]

 

[The Barbarian]

On 6/1/2022 at 8:22 AM, Heleadethme said:

Just to interject a thought here, that "good, bad or neutral" mutations are often relative to the environmental conditions at the time and place the creature happens to be living in. 

Absolutely.   And it's good to bring this up frequently.   What's adaptive in some environments is often harmful in others.

 

[SwordMaster]

On 5/8/2022 at 9:41 AM, The Barbarian said:

Information, in a living population, is the amount of information for each gene locus.    Since most genes have a number of alleles (different versions of the gene) the total information for that gene would be found by multiplying the frequency of each allele by the log of the frequency of each allele, and then summing all the products.   

Hence, every new mutation increases the information in a population.    Which is evolution, i.e. a change in allele frequency in a population over time.    Demonstration of this will be provided if requested.

It often the case that isolated populations have lower information than larger ones for the obvious reason.    And these are often where speciation occurs.   Following speciation, mutation often greatly increases information, for example as in Hawaiian flies and Darwin's finches.

 

There are a number or problems with your take here, first of which is the false definition of evolution (which evolutionists use 5 different definitions depending upon what they are pushing TOE to be). Genetic change within a population is nothing more than expressed genes previously dormant because they were not needed (the difference between a valley goat and a mountain goat - they are both the same goat, only different genes are expressed for longer shaggier fur, larger hooves, etc).

Genes are expressed because they are triggered by environmental cues, not because of mutations...you apparently have been reading too many evolution propaganda books. New mutations do not add information to DNA, they only add nonsense (whether repeats, additions, or substitutions, which includes silent mutations). There are many very well written books by actual scientists that demonstrate the farce of molecules to man evolution...I would highly suggest that you pick some up and read the facts, rather than reading TOEist assumptions mixed with those facts.

 

Blessings!

[The Barbarian]

10 hours ago, SwordMaster said:

There are a number or problems with your take here, first of which is the false definition of evolution

There's only one.   Here it is:

Evolution is a change in allele frequencies over time.

10 hours ago, SwordMaster said:

Genetic change within a population is nothing more than expressed genes previously dormant because they were not needed

No, that's wrong, too.   For example, the Milano mutation in humans, which provides protection from hardening of arteries) occurred to a known individual in Italy, and is now spreading through the population.   There are many other such mutations known.   You were simply misled about that.

10 hours ago, SwordMaster said:

New mutations do not add information to DNA,

I showed you the math on this in another thread, showing how a new mutation increases information in the population genome.   No point in denying the fact.  

10 hours ago, SwordMaster said:

New mutations do not add information to DNA, they only add nonsense

I would think that protection against arteriosclerosis is anything but nonsense.   We'll just have to disagree there.  The problem here, is you do not know what "information" is.

10 hours ago, SwordMaster said:

There are many very well written books by actual scientists that demonstrate the farce of molecules to man evolution

But you can't think of even one?   I know why.

Learn about these things and find out why even honest creationists admit that there is very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory.

 

Edited August 10, 2022 by The Barbarian
typo

[SwordMaster]

12 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

There's only one.   Here it is:

Evolution is a change in allele frequencies over time.

No, that's wrong, too.   For example, the Milano mutation in humans, which provides protection from hardening of arteries) occurred to a known individual in Italy, and is now spreading through the population.   There are many other such mutations known.   You were simply misled about that.

I showed you the math on this in another thread, showing how a new mutation increases information in the population genome.   No point in denying the fact.  

I would think that protection against arteriosclerosis is anything but nonsense.   We'll just have to disagree there.  The problem here, is you do not know what "information" is.

But you can't think of even one?   I know why.

Learn about these things and find out why even honest creationists admit that there is very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory.

 

I thought you were the same ... person that I have debated before on other threads. You are the brain washed guy who believes the lies and perversions that evolutionary "scientists" give to those who don't know any better, and who comes to Christian forums with the goal to overthrow people's faith by the lies and deceptions that you post.

Not one of the claims you have made in this exchange is true, but since you are a true believer in these deceptive lies, you will not ever be able to see truth.

I will just post the actual facts that your nonsense directly contradicts, but I will not engage your nonsense since you are unable to see truth.

 

[one.opinion]

11 minutes ago, SwordMaster said:

and who comes to Christian forums with the goal to overthrow people's faith by the lies and deceptions that you post.

If your faith is overthrown by  someone else accepting evolution, then your faith is not very strong, and you probably have larger concerns.