Joined: Jan. 2007
|Quote (Richardthughes @ May 29 2007,09:27)|
|Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ May 29 2007,09:25)|
|Quote (franky172 @ May 29 2007,09:14)|
|KairosFocus and Phevans are going at it over on the "Sewell's law" (snicker) thread.|
KairosFocus would like to argue points that aren't being discussed. A new prince tard?
|The overall functionality of the yeast is decreased in its normal environment, thus when the stress is removed from the mutant yeast, the original yeast will be favored by selection over the mutant yeast.|
Clearly you have not demonstrated a gain in information since you have not “built a better overall yeast” that will be favored by selection.
Um, what if you don't remove the stress from the mutant yeast? Does that disprove ID? Don't enviroments ever change? erm....
he (it?) adds
|Gene duplication, polyploidy, insertions, etc. do not help — they represent an increase in amount of DNA, but not an increase in the amount of functional genetic information—these create nothing new.|
Um, would this be the complex specified information that you cannot quantify? And DS admits you cannot? errrr....
Does the copied gene give redundancy? If so that is a new function, with new information...
Obviously KairosFocus and BornAgain are ignorant of the large number of beneficial mutations that have been observed.
That's OK. We're all ignorant about some things, I just choose not to spout off about those things I am ignorant of.