Can information be added to DNA?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TobyDarkeness
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dna Information
AI Thread Summary
DNA can indeed have information added to it, a concept supported by genetic engineering practices such as gene duplication and vertical gene transfer. Experiments, like those involving the Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP), demonstrate how DNA can be modified to express new traits. The discussion highlights that creationist views often conflict with established scientific timelines and evolutionary processes, particularly regarding the domestication of canids. While some argue against the possibility of adding information to DNA, evidence from laboratory studies shows mutations can lead to new protein functions. Ultimately, engaging with creationist arguments may yield little productive dialogue, as their theories often lack scientific coherence.
TobyDarkeness
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Hi I'm debating a creationist and he makes the claim that no DNA can be added to a genome. Says there are no experiments. Can someone help me with concepts or sources to experiments? Thanks
 
Biology news on Phys.org
This is simply not true. It is the entire basis of genetic engineering.

For a fun example, many cells are made to fluoresce by engineering them to express Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP). This is regularly used to track a particular cell line in a culture.
 
Likely no scientific argument will convince her/him.

Anyway, most creationists believe that the dog, wolf, coyote, fox, jackal, ethiopian wolf, Indian wild dog, African wild dog, (and some other now extinct species like dire wolf, but I guess they all went extinct during the flood) evolved from a common ancestor in less than 6000 years. This argument works because they cannot deny dog domestication, meaning you can make a 'kind' from a 'kind', whatever they call it. Does that not add information?

In fact, if you calculate the speed, creationist evolution adds information at a faster rate than neodarwinian evolution.

Science puts several canid-ancestors at 400,000 tot 100,000 years ago. And you just had a thread on domestication. Obviously wolves split off from all other canids long before that. That means you need to add information about 100x faster for Noah's evolution, so that all the 'kinds' Noah put on the arc(they need this because otherwise there are too many species, making it absurd even in the eyes of creationists) can evolve into all the species we have now.

That we can see in the lab how proteins of bacteria mutate and gain new properties onder evolutionary pressure, that we can tell exactly where the mutation occurs and how it creates protein homologue that have very different functions, they don't care for that at all.

Best to try to attack their contradictions and absurdities. Attack that version of creationism as a creationist with an entirely different view of creationisms. Because creationism is wrong, they all struggle coming up with a creationist theory that that makes sense. So they all came up with their own crazy variants.

But even better, just give up. You will only get negative energy from any attempt to persuade them.
 
Last edited:
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
I use ethanol for cleaning glassware and resin 3D prints. The glassware is sometimes used for food. If possible, I'd prefer to only keep one grade of ethanol on hand. I've made sugar mash, but that is hardly the least expensive feedstock for ethanol. I had given some thought to using wheat flour, and for this I would need a source for amylase enzyme (relevant data, but not the core question). I am now considering animal feed that I have access to for 20 cents per pound. This is a...
Back
Top