colewd made a comment I found interesting:
We should also admit the major evolutionary transitions are poorly understood because they require significant new biological information.
We should educate them on what biological information is.
We should admit that the origin of biological information is poorly understood.
I followed up with a question:
Can you give an example? Is Lenski’s experement an example of such biological information arriving? If so, why? If not, why not?
I understand you think the Lenski experiment is evidence of rmns creating biological information despite very small changes to the actual DNA sequences.
Lets agree to disagree here or we may derail the op.
In order to not detail the OP this OP has been created for further discussion.
Some questions for colewd:
Is there a threshold of the size of the changes before biological information can be said to have been created? What is it?
Does the length of the DNA sequence have to change before it is considered that new biological information has been created?
What was the change in the amount of biological information in the Lenski experiment? Did it go up, down or stay the same? Justify your answer.
Is it impossible for ‘rmns’ to create new biological information? If so, where does it actually come from? And how do you know that?
What is the definition of “significant biological information”? Can you put a figure on it? If you can’t how do you know that “rmns” cannot achieve that level of change?
What is the maximum “rmns” can achieve on it’s own with regard to “biological information”? Can it increase, decrease or do nothing?