[__ Science __ ] How evolution adds (or subtracts) information

[Dorothy Mae]

In fact, we have dozens of them that were not present in either of our parents. A few are harmful. A very few are beneficial. Natural selection sorts them out. Bad ones tend to disappear, especially if they are dominant. Good ones tend to be preserved and spread in the population.

The good ones, as I wrote, are not preserved in the population as they do not give any advantage in reproductive years. This theory you hold has no matches in real people. And as I said, no expecting parents rejoice when the doctor tells them that their child has a genetic mutation. That is the test of the theory, not even evolutionary biologists rejoice to know their unborn has a mutation.

What's good for the species may very well be not good for the individual. That's how it is.

They are confirmation of the theory, which predicts such mutations.

What? The individual dies but the species receives a benefit from a mutation?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Well the Lord caused the mutant gene information to go recessive until He calls on it. Maybe!

Hi Ed, I would not bring God into this as he has set up the biology to work on its own. He is not making the individual babies and we know how babies are formed. God wisely set up human to go and reproduce without his needing to do anything. In a fallen world, genetic mistakes, like other mistakes, happen. As best they are benign. None of them make for a better person. Looking at skeletons from the past, we have actually degraded with the millennia.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Mutations. That's all that's needed. "Information" is just a measure of uncertainty in the message. For example, if there is fixation and there is only one allele in the population, then there will be no uncertainty as to the allele in any specific member of the population. And given the frequency of 1.0, then log (1.0) X 1.0 = 0 and the information for that allele would be zero. Because finding the allele for that individual would tell you nothing you don't already know.

You do not reckon with the possibility that the mutation is a loss of information, do you? You see the genetic code relays manufacturing information. If a piece is missing or changed or even added, that manufacturing end product cannot be reached and the creature might suffer ill health. It is like this: What information does the following give you?

Tzdhrue ehwieoatllher tfodoy wpliill jbu döpangoeorlosius.

I have added "code" (letters) to the normal sentence. There are mutations there. Does this give new information?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Maybe, if it's a new mutation. generally, that's just a recessive coming out when two people with one gene for red hair, have children and one of them happens to get both recessives. But we're talking about new mutations adding information here.



Intelligent Design guys call it "front-loading." The idea that God created the universe with rules that allowed new information to appear by mutation in living things. Which sounds reasonable. I think that's what happens. The information isn't there initially, but He made things so that new information is always appearing. This is how adaptation and evolution work.

He didn't directly do it, but He made the universe to bring forth life and for life to change over time as needed.

Except we need example of changes producing new information. If two people produce an albino offspring, there is genetic change but a loss of information. The cells cannot produce melanin that is needed in the skin as protection. A genetic change, but a loss of information. Since human beings are generally degrading over time, it does not look like God did anything of the sort. We are weaker, have teeth that decay, bones are more brittle, and don't live as long as man originally did. Sounds like genetic decay.

The ID community has some major problems both in the biology and theology. It is like being lukewarm, neither one nor the other.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No. Every new mutation in a population adds information. You have to remember some important things:
1. "Information" applies to a population of organisms, not a single individual. Individuals don't change their genomes.
2. "Useful information" applies only in context of the environment. Light skin, which evolved in a few tens of thousands of years ago, was adaptive only when humans moved into colder climates where sunlight was sparse in the winter.
3. "Information" may or may not be useful, and often doesn't become useful until much later. Some people have a mutation that provides very good resistance to HIV. This was an entirely neutral mutation until HIV evolved and then it became a very useful mutation.

Ever heard of PKU? That is a genetic mutation that when homozygous results in the offspring unable to produce a particular protein that results in severe health problems. It is a change where information is LOST. Information is not added but lost. Why do you not acknowledge this possibility that medical science has known for a long time and is combating it.

In 1996 this method enabled molecular biologist Stephen O’Brien and his colleagues to discover a rare genetic mutation that protects against the human immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS.

Most people have a protein receptor present primarily on the surface of certain immune cells called the chemokine receptor 5, or CCR5. This receptor allows HIV to bind with and enter the cell. But O'Brien’s team discovered that some people have a mutation that produces a defective receptor.

To be resistant, an individual needs two copies of this so-called delta-32 mutation—one from each parent. A single copy can still allow the virus to infect cells, although it slows down the patient’s trajectory to developing AIDS.

Are some people resistant to COVID-19? Geneticists are on the hunt.

Thousands of people repeatedly exposed to the virus never got sick. Scientists hope their DNA may hold clues to new kinds of treatments.

www.nationalgeographic.com

This is an example of loss of information. Just like bacteria that become antibiotic resistant have lost information, binding sites, that provides an advantage, so this mutation provides a rare advantage.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

My question is, where does the new information come from?

In a word “code.” When a programmer wants to add function, they add code. It’s designed code.

Evolution insists random chance code was added that resulted in improved function at the start. Try putting random chance code into computer software and see if improved function is the result.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Every new mutation in a population adds information. The equation is:

Where H is the information, and p is the frequency of each allele in the population. This is the same theory that allows you to communicate over the internet, and to allow NASA to communicate with spacecraft over millions of kilometers of space.

A simple example: Suppose there are two alleles for a certain gene in a population, each at 0.5 frequency. Using the Shannon equation above, the information for that gene is about 0.30.

Then a mutation occurs, producing a new allele, which eventually increases so that each allele has about 0.333 frequency. The information then is about 0.48.

I think you don’t understand what information means in terms of biological function.

If I take a word and add to it such that the “frequency” has increased, is this new information to you? Let’s try:

ingrtfotyrmatppion

I have now increased information right? Do you think this increased information improves communication? You do know that information has the purpose of communicating right? It’s isn’t strictly a numbers game in living biology.

As you see, such new mutations increase information. Always. Perhaps you don't know what "information" means in a measurable way. What do you think it means?

Did you instantly know what word I wrote above when I added new information? I can give another with much more complexity and see if it still communicates the same. If you figured it out, it’s only because you ignored the new “information.”

For anyone reading, genetic information communicates to the elements of the cell (and particular cells) what to manufacture for the life and well-being (hopefully) of the body. Mutations often inhibit that correct manufacturing process. So for B, this is “adding” information’ i.e., numbers. For the living creature, it’s a risk.

You seem to have confused "information" with "useful." There are, of course, many useful mutations even though most of them are neither useful nor harmful. Would you like to learn about some of them?

Information in manufacturing proteins we need to live is more than useful. Information that inhibits that or eliminates it can cause death in some cases. This is not merely an abstract exercise.

Again none of the mutations suggested gave the offspring having them a survival advantage in or before reproductive years. NONE. If evolutionary theory (man from non-man)were true in living biology, we would see tons. We see zero. You can apply all the mathematical formulas in the computer lab you want but walk down the hall to the biology lab and real life (or death) will meet you.

 

[Edward]

In a word “code.” When a programmer wants to add function, they add code. It’s designed code.

Evolution insists random chance code was added that resulted in improved function at the start. Try putting random chance code into computer software and see if improved function is the result.

I like how you talk. It may be biological as you say at least for the most part. But I think we have to look at this with a spiritual eye and bring God into it too because scripture says all good things come from God, and that Jesus sustains all things and holds them together. Besides, we're 90% a spiritual world and 10% material and that includes the flesh too, right?! And scripture also says, before you formed me in my mothers womb...so God seems to have His hand in it even tho it's is somewhat biological.

I have to say somewhat biological because this is 90% a spiritual world as we know, but we can't see. Anyway, code. I think you're right, this is one of those, if then go to autopilot things built in. There has to be a code because God would not sustain sin and the effects of sin in a fallen world will take it's own course. So there must be a trigger in the code that when it pops up from a specific sequence of biological events...(wait for it)...it sets off an alarm in the spiritual realm which means, we need some hands on here a choice needs to be made (click here, lol).

Then Jesus steps in and does a patch. Forms it in the womb. He, inserts an additional line of code at that time which will function with respect to all of the biological events which led up to the event and with respect to all of the corresponding spiritual events which happen by our actions and choices in this world.

It's a fallen world and all of the sin leads to eventual death so that is information that is taken away. And why biological mutations work at all at times is because Jesus sustains them. To keep things working and extending the time so His harvest can be a little bigger!
Or so it seems to me!

 

[Edward]

So if information taken away is sin and it's effects, then added information is Jesus (or His staff) at work in the fields of His Garden. Weeding it (info out), adding fertilizer (info in), but we don't get to see that happening. The spiritual effects of sin and ongoing partial restorations in response to sins effects.

I don't think we can, not bring God into it. The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, which is to say spread out over the entire earth, everywhere. Omnipresent. And if Jesus is in all and sustaining everythng and everyone...then it's reasonable to assume that our actions in this 10% material world / 90% spiritual world, will have profound effects in the spiritual realm.

It had to be sin that blinded man to the spiritual realm. Scripture instructs us to look to the unseen. I think every thought that we have, every action that we take, every choice that we make, have profound effects in the spiritual realm. Which we can't see but we can read about in scripture. I doubt God made 2 headed Deer, that was Chernobyls fault. God don't sustain sin and it's effects, just life. So we will see mutant animals here and there. Proof the world is fallen. And scripture tells us that some sins will affect the children to the 4th generation? Whoops, lost some coded information!

Soooo...Be kind. loving and helpful to all you meet today, that your children may live long healthy lives.

(That must be the thing about good works? Do good works and actions build up our spirit (and treasures) in the spiritual realm in contrast to sin causing decay and loss of information?)

 

[Barbarian]

I think you don’t understand what information means in terms of biological function.

I have a degree in biology. I have a master's in systems. I know precisely what it means. It's not what you seem to think it is.

If I take a word and add to it such that the “frequency” has increased, is this new information to you? Let’s try:

ingrtfotyrmatppion

I have now increased information right?

[/QUOTE]

Yep. And here's what you don't get. It's not about "meaning" for humans. You're trying to make genetic information into human communication. And there your reasoning goes off the rails.

Every new allele "makes sense" in terms of genes and inheritance. Some of the alleles are immediately useful. Most are not. Some are harmful. But natural selection uses that new information to change the population genome by tending ro remove the harmful ones and keeping useful ones. And that's why it works. Keep in mind "harmful" and "useful" only count in terms of environment. The utility of alleles will change as the environment changes.

For anyone reading, genetic information communicates to the elements of the cell (and particular cells) what to manufacture for the life and well-being (hopefully) of the body. Mutations often inhibit that correct manufacturing process. So for B, this is “adding” information’ i.e., numbers. For the living creature, it’s a risk.

It is a risk. And an opportunity. And no, most mutations don't harm the organism; you have a few dozen new ones yourself, and it's highly unlikely that any of them will ever do anything to harm you.

Again none of the mutations suggested gave the offspring having them a survival advantage in or before reproductive years.

No, that's wrong. For example, having resistance to disease is a powerful benefit. Likewise, more durable bones are certainly a survival benefit.

If evolutionary theory (man from non-man)were true in living biology, we would see tons.

There certainly are a lot of them. One interesting one is the HbS mutation. It provides protection against malaria. If one has one normal allele for hemoglobin and one HbS allele in an area where malaria is endemic, then one will be protected. A person with two normal alleles will likely get malaria and die or be an invalid. A person with two HbS alleles will not get malaria, but will have a blood disorder that will be kill or disable the individual.

So let's look at it. Suppose two people with normal hemoglobin have children. They will likely be infected and die or be invalids. Suppose two people with one normal and one HbS allele have children. Then, about 25% of them will not be protected (2 normal alleles), 25% will suffer sickle cell anemia (2 HbS alleles) and 50 percent will be healthy (one of each). So anywhere that malaria is sufficiently established that at least half of the population will be bitten by a malaria-carrying mosquito, you will expect to see the HbS gene in large number in the population.

Yes, it's a grim choice, but nature can be like that.

But nature wasn't done here. A while back, a second mutation occurred. HbC not only protects against malaria, it also doesn't cripple or kill those with two HbC alleles. And not surprisingly, it's increasing in the population where malaria is endemic, and normal and HbS alleles are becoming less common.

You can apply all the mathematical formulas in the computer lab you want but walk down the hall to the biology lab and real life (or death) will meet you.

I spent a lot of years in biology labs, including immunology. And I have a graduate degree in systems. You've told me that you haven't. BTW, information theory, which lets you use the internet and NASA to communicate with spacecraft, only works on biological systems and products of biological systems.

Claude Shannon founded information theory in the 1940s. The theory has long been known to be closely related to thermodynamics and physics through the similarity of Shannon's uncertainty measure to the entropy function. Recent work using information theory to understand molecular biology has unearthed a curious fact: Shannon’s channel capacity theorem only applies to living organisms and their products, such as communications channels and molecular machines that make choices from several possibilities. Since he used a property of biology to formulate his mathematics, the author concludes that Claude Shannon was doing biology and was therefore, effectively, a biologist - although he was probably unaware of it. What are the implications of the idea that Shannon was doing biology? First, the author claims it means that communications systems and molecular biology are headed on a collision course. As electrical circuits approach molecular sizes, the results of molecular biologists can be used to guide designs. We might envision a day when communications and biology are treated as a single field. Second, codes discovered for communications potentially teach us new biology if we find the same codes in a biological system. Finally, the reverse is also to be anticipated: discoveries in molecular biology about systems that have been refined by evolution for billions of years should tell us how to build new and more efficient communications systems.
IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine ( Volume: 25, Issue: 1, Jan.-Feb. 2006)
My emphasis.

 

[Barbarian]

Soooo...Be kind. loving and helpful to all you meet today, that your children may live long healthy lives.

(That must be the thing about good works? Do good works and actions build up our spirit (and treasures) in the spiritual realm in contrast to sin causing decay and loss of information?)

They do, so long as you don't try to impress people with your goodness...

Matthew 6:2 Therefore when thou dost an almsdeed, sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be honoured by men. Amen I say to you, they have received their reward.

Wait for it, and your reward for good works will be in your salvation.

 

[Barbarian]

Ever heard of PKU? That is a genetic mutation that when homozygous results in the offspring unable to produce a particular protein that results in severe health problems. It is a change where information is LOST. Information is not added but lost.

No. That's not the way it works. Lets say you have a population of 100 people, all homozygous for the normal allele. The information in that population for that allele is 0.0. Information is defined by the degree of uncertainty of what the next message (in this case someone's genes) will be. No uncertainty, no information.

Now suppose there's one person born with the PKU allele. Then the information in that population goes from 0.0 to about 0.02.

It's an increase in the information for that gene. You're confusing function in one person with information in the population.

Why do you not acknowledge this possibility that medical science has known for a long time and is combating it.

See above. You don't know what "information" is.

 

[Barbarian]

Except we need example of changes producing new information.

The Milano mutation, for example. As you have seen, any new mutation in a population adds to information. You're thinking about usefulness. The Milano mutation happens to be an example of both increase in information (new allele in the population) and usefulness ( prevention of arteriosclerosis).

But many new mutations (probably like the 60 or so you have) add information to a population, but don't affect usefulness at all.

 

[Barbarian]

You do not reckon with the possibility that the mutation is a loss of information, do you?

It's why I said "new mutation." And old mutation could reduce information. Let's use the PKU example. If we have 99 people with normal alleles and one PKU person, the information for that allele in the population is about 0.02. But if that person dies and a new person is born with a normal allele, then everyone has the same allele, and the information is 0.0, a loss of information. Play with Shannon's equation a bit to see how it works.

You see the genetic code relays manufacturing information. If a piece is missing or changed or even added, that manufacturing end product cannot be reached

No, that's very, very wrong. Most point mutations don't do much of anything. Cytochrome C is a protein needed for oxidative phosphorylation, a very basic process found in all organisms. But there are dozens of different forms of the enzyme. You see, a single mutation in an enzyme probably won't harm its activity. But there are some critical places in the protein that cannot change without doing so. And those we never see change. Because that would kill the organism having that mutation.

Evolution insists random chance code was added that resulted in improved function at the start.

Like the gene that offers some resistance to malaria or the one that offers resistance to HIV. Or the mutation that produced the Milano lipoprotein. Happens a lot.

Try putting random chance code into computer software and see if improved function is the result.

That's being done now in engineering. Some problems are very difficult to solve using design. But often, they can be solved by using evolutionary processes. Engineers have copied evolutionary processes to do so. These are called "Genetic Algorithms" and the are often very effective:

Genetic Algorithms Optimization of Diesel Engine Emissions and Fuel Efficiency with Air Swirl, EGR,Injection Timing and Multiple Injections​

Genetic Algorithms Optimization of Diesel Engine Emissions and Fuel Efficiency with Air Swirl, EGR,Injection Timing and Multiple Injections

The present study extends the recently developed HIDECS-GA computer code to optimize diesel engine emissions and fuel economy with the existing techniques, such as exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) and multiple injections.A computational model of diesel engines named HIDECS is incorporated with the ge

www.sae.org

Here's a short description of how they work:

Genetic Algorithmâââexplained step by step with example

A step by step description of Genetic Algorithm and its application in numerical optimization problem.

towardsdatascience.com

Darwinian processes work better than design for very complex problems. As usual, God had it right.

 

[Barbarian]

Since you can only link to these and not describe them yourself, it is pretty easy to answer. Some basics in the evolutionary theory first. In order for the evolutionary process to have actually been the reason a creature has the features we see today, there has to have been genetic changes from parent to offspring that gave that offspring better chances of surviving and reproducing in that environment as compared to offspring who do not have that change. This is the basic understanding.

That's only part of it. Here's the theory:
1. More are born than can survive to reproduce
2. Every organism is slightly different from its parents
3. Some of these differences affect the ability of the organism to survive long enough to reproduce.
4. Those that help tend to be retained and those that harm tend to be removed by natural selection.
5. This process explains speciation

 

[Edward]

They do, so long as you don't try to impress people with your goodness...

Matthew 6:2 Therefore when thou dost an almsdeed, sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be honoured by men. Amen I say to you, they have received their reward.

Wait for it, and your reward for good works will be in your salvation.

Yeah, we're supposed to do it in secret. That's one reason I stopped talking about my testimonies so much. After awhile it started feeling more like bragging than sharing the goodness of the Lord. Which it did I guess, but it still didn't feel right. I have a lot of testimonies. The Lord has been real good to me. And not because I'm good in any way, lol. That's just Him!

But I have too many testimonies I think. And more happen, but...most Christians are lucky if they have one or two testimonies to tell, so me posting new ones daily didn't sound right to me! And I'm nobody! It's a wee bit conflicting for me.

 

[Barbarian]

No evolutionary gain to show this. In the malaria surviving adjustment, while it is true those with the defect in their genetic makeup are more likely to survive malaria, their offspring, when mating with an equally surviving partner, are more likely to have the defect from both parents and unless modern medical aid is available, the offspring will likely die of sickle cell anemia. This is hardly a genetic advantage supporting the evolutionary process, the subsequent offspring dying.

No, you have that wrong. As you learned, whenever malaria is sufficiently endemic to affect half of the population, the HbS allele will give offspring an advantage in surviving to reproduce. Would you like me to show you the numbers again?

You're missing the fact that heterozygotes are both immune to malaria and do not get sickle cell anemia. So two heterozygotes can expect about 50% of their offspring to be healthy. As long as malaria affects at least half of the population, heteryzygotes have an advantage over normals, and the HbS allele will rise in frequency to maximize the number of heterozygotes. Not surprisingly, when malaria is eradicated, we see the frequency of the allele decline. For reasons you probably understand. The newer, HbC allele, because it does not kill or disable those with two HbC alleles, is now increasing in malaria areas over the two older mutations.

 

[Barbarian]

Yeah, we're supposed to do it in secret. That's one reason I stopped talking about my testimonies so much. After awhile it started feeling more like bragging than sharing the goodness of the Lord. Which it did I guess, but it still didn't feel right. I have a lot of testimonies. The Lord has been real good to me. And not because I'm good in any way, lol. That's just Him!

"Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven."

It's not just a reward. Loving others enough to help them in need, conditions your soul such that it increasingly seeks out God. Unless you have other reasons for doing it.

 

[Edward]

That's right. it must be instrumental in us taking on the image of Christ.

 

[Barbarian]

Tzdhrue ehwieoatllher tfodoy wpliill jbu döpangoeorlosius.

I have added "code" (letters) to the normal sentence. There are mutations there. Does this give new information?

Yes. Because you've increased uncertainty in the message. If you had just written "The weather today will be.." then there is less information. You're still confusing information with usefulness or meaning. That's not how it works. It can be used so. And BTW, some things like that above message can be used to do metamessages within an innocuous sentence. Some intelligence agencies do things like that.