Proof that not all mutations are deleterious

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Creationists like to claim that while mutations do happen, they are always bad and never useful. In the event a mutation does seem to serve a useful purpose, they will resort to the argument that it is really a loss of information rather than an increase. This is a safe position in general, since the word 'information' can be redfined on the fly however they see fit.

Suppose we were to attempt a neutral definition for 'information' regarding DNA. Can we not agree that DNA that produces useful traits counts as information?

Here is a verifiable mutation, that is a net gain for the bug in question, as well as an increase in useful genetic material (increase in information).

Bacterial mutation metabolizes nylon

This mutation was not coaxed in a lab, but happened in nature. Nylon is a synthetic material that has never existed before in nature until men invented it in the recent past.

Answersingenesis attempted to hand wave this away by claiming that since the information resided on a plasmid, it must have always been there:

Answers in genesis on the nylon bug

However, this is not a refutation at all. For the bacteria in question, the original and mutated plasmids are both well documented, and the mutated plasmid resulted from a frame shift of a non-coding sequence (aka junk DNA). This is a new capability for this bacteria, not merely an adaptation of some previous capability. Not only that, but it resuls from a mutation that increased genetic material. This mutation turned genetic garbage into gold, exactly as evolution predicts, and gave this bacteria a food source without competition (nylon).




posted on Sep, 27 2005 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Maybe its just me, but I really cant see what you are trying to point out?



posted on Sep, 27 2005 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Lots of people think that any mutation is going to be 'bad', and that you can't get adaptation thru any process that starts off with mutation. Which is nonsense, since mutations can be good or bad.



posted on Sep, 27 2005 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I'm pointing out that there are mutations that are beneficial, increase genetic information, and could not possibly have been latent.

A mutation that turns unused garbage DNA into a useful trait that allows a bacteria to eat a synthetic material (nylon) that was not part of "creation" satisfies all the typical demands of creationists for proof of evolutionary mutations.

This is a perfect example of information (DNA that results in useful traits) increasing as the result of a mutation.





new topics
 
0

log in

join