click here to learn more about being redeemed from sin and set free to serve God in spirit and in truth. click here to learn more about holiness click here to learn more about being changed into the same image click here to learn more about sowing and reaping click here to learn more about the free gift of righteousness. click here to learn more about how faith gives us access to grace and grace does the works. click here to learn more about faith and how it comes. click here to learn more about acknowledging Jesus click here to learn more about how God speaks Who will you listen to?  Click here to learn more. click here to learn more about the pattern of God. click here to learn more about the pattern of God for individuals, marriage, and family. click here to learn more about the pattern of God for the local church click here to learn more about the Church universal
 
SeekFind Logo Menu

Questions and Answers: What is the basis for your statement that no new genetic information is produced or created?

 

If you have not read Stories Versus Truth, you may want to read that before reading this.

Question:

My question regards the creation of new 'information'. First is this 'genetic' information that is not produced? Are you saying that no new genetic information is ever produced by natural means?

Answer:

Yes. We are saying that no new innovative genetic information of the type needed for even the smallest advance in so-called molecules-to-man evolution is ever produced by natural means--at least not that has ever been observed.  Random processes appear to destroy information just as the scientific laws of information tell us.  No evidence has come forward of any new genetic information ever being created by natural means. Mutations often result in changes to informaton, but information is lost or distorted, but no examples exist of genetic information being increased or created by natural means.   It is illegitimate to use Natural Selection to support Evolution.  Natural Selection supports a young Earth and a Creator. 

(read about the laws of information here, here, here, and here.)

(Read the latest science on the subject: Without Excuse by Werner Gitt, a description of the scientific Laws of Universal Information. See also: Information Theory Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4. Here is another interesting article.) More is constantly being learned about information and about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Evolutionists tend to hide in the weeds of the unknown with an argument from ignorance: "If you can't prove, by empirical science, that evolution is impossible, then it happened." By empirical science alone, we can only prove probabilities. The probabilities show the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story to be a bazaar hypothesis, a story that is so improbable that it should not be considered. However, empirical science is not a tool that can prove anything to be true or false absolutely. For absolute proof, we have revelation. (See Basic and Concise Guide to Practical, Useful Logic and Reasoning). God says that He created everything. He is the One Who enforces the laws of nature. He is the One Who will judge all of us in the end. We know that because we know Him presonally through the indwelling Presence of Jesus Christ and the moment-by-moment instruction of the Holy Spirit.

The following chart makes it plain that every instance of supposed increase of information that is used by Evolution's evangelists is an example of NO increase in information.  Evolutionist's claims for adding information fall into three categories.  These are the 3 Rs of Evolution: Rearrange information, Remove information, and Ruin information.  See: The 3 Rs of evolution 

 

The 3 Rs of Evolution: Rearrange information, Remove information, and Ruin information.

 

Using an analogy of a train, Evolution hopes to go from Missouri in Central U.S. to California.  However, the train is going the wrong direction toward New York, with each small change being the result of a loss of information or simply a rearrangement of what is already there.  The evolution train’s a-comin’The evolution train goes the wrong way on the map.

See: Is Antibiotic Resistance Really Due to Information Gain?

Question:

Second: Practically every pro-evolution site claims that evolution does produce new genetic information. So I would appreciate the basis for your statement that no new information is produced.

Answer:

First, see the chart near the top of this page.

This may help. Read: Without Excuse by Werner Gitt, a description of the scientific Laws of Universal Information.

The basis for the statement that no new information is produced is plain in the frustrated Evolutionist quote below. There are many examples of claims by Evolutionists of proof of Evolutionism. Some of these false claims are the claims that "a new example exists that is evidence that mutations can generate an increase in information." Each time a claim is made, that claim must be tested by science. Observation and logic are applied. Since Evolutionists seem to be incapable of challenging any claim in favor of Evolutionism, it falls on the Creationists to apply science and see whether or not the claim is valid. To date, no claim has been valid. (Examples of false claims) It may be possible that a random event could actually add information, and it also may be possible that a random event could even add information that would be beneficial. The odds against this are very extreme. Even if an example were to be found, which has not happened, the finding of an example would not verify Evolution. We can see that the possibility of adding information is remote. The possibility of improving design by random process is insanely remote. The overall trend will always be downward. That is what science tells us. Every scientist knows this, but the social pressure and economic sanctions against any scientist who does not embrace and defend Evolutionism at all costs are so great that scientists tend not to even want to notice that their thinking is inconsistent and muddled. It is much more comfortable to just keep going with the flow.

In the same way, it is also possible that random events could add to the order and potential energy in one part of the universe. However, that would result in a reduction of order and potential energy in another part of the universe. The Second Law of Thermodynamics has never been refuted. No exception to this law has ever been shown. (Read More) The laws that regulate information apparently follow the same pattern as The Second Law of Thermodynamics.

The Evolutionists will tell you a half truth about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The Evolutionists will put forth the half truth: "The Second Law of Thermodynamics only applies to isolated systems, so it's not relevant to evolution, because the Earth is an open system." This is a clever lie. Here is the part of the truth that they are withholding: the Second Law of Thermodynamics was derived using theoretical isolated systems, but it applies to all systems, and can only be overcome locally and temporarily in open systems when stringent conditions are met. Not only that, but we are not talking about the Earth. The Earth is just a subsystem of a much larger system called the Universe. The Universe is an isolated system. Evolutionists claim that Evolution took place in this isolated system, but the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that their story is a myth.

More information on the Second Law of Thermodynamics can be found here & here & here & here & here

The following is quote of a lie that was given by an Evolutionist.

"No matter what example is offered as evidence that mutations can generate an increase in information, Creationists naturally have rationales for regarding that example as a case of loss of information. But every time Creationists "prove" another mutation to be an example of information loss, they add one more item to the list of biological changes which don't require a gain of information! If this pattern continues, Creationists will eventually "prove" that no biological change requires an increase in information; hence, they will have destroyed their own argument."

First, see the chart near the top of this page.  Second, the logic of this evolutionist is not sound when the evolutionist claims, "hence, they will have destroyed their own argument."  Third, the reason that no matter what example is offered as evidence that mutations can generate an increase in information, creationists point out that these are losses in information is that every example that evolutionists offer is an example that is, in fact, a loss of information.  This has led evolutionists to avoid this conversation altogether, claiming that the definition of information is very difficult to understand and that no one really knows what is and is not information.  Of course, this is not true.  See Information Theory

This evolutionist quote points out the difference between science and evolutionism. Let me re-phrase the quote to state the lie that is found in the quote more clearly:

Since we cannot find any evidence of mutations generating an increase in information, we Evolution-Believers must present lies in which we claim that information has been added when in fact information has been removed or swapped or duplicated or moved around. We resent the fact that Creation-Believers logically and rationally point out the fact that information has not been added. Therefore we Evolution-Believers would like to float an implication that even if we were able to find a case where information would be added we think that the Creation-Believers would rationalize (that is reason in a way that is not consistent with sane, logical, and rational thought) and say that an actual increase in information did not occur. We would like to imply that Creation-Believers would not be able to admit it even if we were to ever find any example of information being added to anything by random chance. (Of course, no such example has actually been found.) And now, we would like to also deceptively imply that all or most biological changes do require gain of information and that Creation-Believers are actually not understanding this and that they are using up all the possible biological changes (and we would like to falsely imply that these all required an increase in information even though no such increase in information has ever been observed) so we, the Evolution-Believers, now claim to have won this argument.

This quote by the Evolutionist is very clever and deceptive in a very illogical sort of way. There is more that is not stated here, but it is implied and must be addressed.

The presentation of arguments like this from Evolution-Believers holds an underlying false assumption. Actually, the false assumption is a bit of loopy logic. Now, we all get caught in loopy logic from time to time, so it is understandable that Evolutionists would also do this. And this is especially true given the tremendous pressure Evolutionists are under to conform to Evolutionism.

Here is the loopy logic: "If we could just prove that Evolution were at all possible by the furthest stretch of the imagination, then we would have proved that Evolution is not only possible but also that it took place and that would prove something about God or about what God did or did not do or about the age of the Earth or about the accuracy of the Bible or about all the above. The reality is that Evolution remains a scientific impossibility. However, even if it were possible that Evolution could have happened, that would in no way prove that it did happen. That would be loopy logic like this: "If x is possible, then x is a possible cause of y so if x can be shown to be possible, then this is proof that x caused y." For example, just suppose that you are arrested for stealing a car. The car was put into a garage five years ago and after five years, the owner looked in the garage and the car was gone. The logic given to the judge is this: "You are capable of stealing the car and you have not always been where witnesses could observe you at every moment over the last five years, so it is possible that you could have stolen the car and that proves that you did steal the car." You would protest that this doesn't prove any such thing. Yet, the whole Evolutionistic political force is built on this type of logic, always proposing some new supposed proof. The proof is never proof that Evolution happened but some proposed hope of proof that Evolution could be possible. Then, another scientist who is not tied to the Evolution money stream will study the supposed proof and show it to be bogus. To pre-suppose that "proving Evolution is possible also proves that Evolution happened" is a deceptive lie.

Evolutionism is a religion that pretends to be science. It has always been deceptive. When one lie is uncovered, it will hang onto the lie as long as it can and then, finally, move on to other lies unabashed.

There are many ways to pretend. One way is to say that Science = the molecules-to-man evolution conjecture / fabrication.  Another is to claim that the molecules-to-man evolution conjecture / fabrication = Science.  It is a conjecture, a fabrication.  It isn't even a scientific theory.  Other variations include claims that Biology depends on Evolution, or claims that Biology is Evolution, or claims that Evolution is Biology. These are not proof of anything but rather the placing of a label on something that is not based on observation and logic. That is not to say that observation and logic are the supreme way to knowledge. Such a statement would be scientism--another religion and a self-refuted religion at that.

Evolutionism is one of many cults invented by the enemy of the minds of humans. The enemy seeks to confuse and distract. He does not care by how much you miss the mark--just so you miss it. There is a meaning and purpose to life and it has nothing at all to do with Evolutionism. (Read More)

People who won't acknowledge God or listen to His Voice will only accept those things that conform to the arbitrary assumptions of Naturalism, materialism, and uniformitarianism. Then they claim that these arbitrary assumptions are facts. Naturalism claims that God does nothing and that there is no God.  Materialism claims that there is no God or spiritual realm.  Uniformitarianism claims that there was not creation and that there was no violent worldwide flood, as the Bible and numerous other historical accounts record.  Whatever they observe that does not conform to this complex filter is censored.  The way that it is censored can take several forms.  The ungodly may boldly proclaim that, though the data appears to support God's version and refute the version of the ungodly, yet it still must be interpreted to mean just the opposite of what it does mean.  A backup method that ungodly people use is to prophecy that in the future, science will be able to explain what they see as an anomaly.  If that fails, they will hide the data, set it aside, or lie to keep the public from knowing the truth.  The data clearly demolishes the story of the ungodly and clearly supports the reality of the Creator God, His Bible, and His abiding Presence in His people.  When confronted with the obvious, a closed-minded ungodly person says, "I can't understand it."  They are willingly ignorant because they refuse to hold God in their knowledge.  The reality is that these people, for whatever reason, don't what to know the Creator.  They don't want to truly know Jesus, their Creator.

 

 

Astronomy

Bible, God, theology

Biology (creation vs evolution)

Creation: relevance to Christianity, society and science

Geology, the Flood, the Ice Age and the age of the earth

  • Young Age Evidence (astronomy, botany, geology, fossils, caves, coal, glaciology, human history, oceanography)
  • Radiometric Dating (radiometric dating problems, flaws, rapid decay? radiohalos)
  • Flood (global? fish survival? Black Sea flood? flood legends).
  • Noah s Ark (size, construction, stability, feasibility, care for animals, diseases, biogeography)
  • Geology (Flood evidences, coal formation, limestone caves, rapid rocks, age of fossils?)
  • Plate Tectonics (continental drift and catastrophic plate tectonics)
  • Ice Age (post-Flood Ice Age, ice core dating, multiple Ice Ages? mammoths)

History

  • Archaeology (archaeology and the Bible, from the Flood to New Testament times)
  • History (including biblical chronology, genealogies, origin of deep time beliefs)
  • Scopes Trial (What is the truth?)
  • Linguistics (languages point to the Tower of Babel, animals talking?)

Paleontology

  • Fossils (rapid formation, missing links, living fossils, dino-birds?, whale origins, tetrapods)
  • Anthropology (human ancestry, alleged ape-men)
  • Dinosaurs (humans coexist with? evidence against millions of years, birds from dinosaurs?
  • Mammoths (how they fit with the post-Flood Ice Age)

 



Author/Compiler
Last updated: Nov, 2013
 
 




Bread Crumbs

 
Home     >   Meaning     >   Christian Witness     >   Answers for Witness     >   Stories Versus Revelation     >   Creation, Flood, Etc.     >   Creation v. Evolution     >   The Problems with Evolution     >   Q&A No New Information?

Main

Foundations

Home

Meaning

Bible

Dictionary

History

Toons & Vids

Quotations

Similar

There Are Several Very Clear Reasons that Evolution Presents False Dogma and These Reasons Cannot Be Refuted.

How Do We Know That Evolutionary Progress Has Never Been Observed?

Evolution Is A Series Of Broken Arguments

There Is No Evidence Of So-Called Evolutionary Links Between Kinds Of Living Things

What Is The Basis Or Mechanism That Would Allow Evolutionism's Claims To Work?

Breeding experiments have done much to debunk the evolutionary dogma.

Complexity, Information, And The 2nd Law Of Thermodynamics Show Evolution To Be Impossible

Nothing Creates Itself -- Ever!

Evolutionists Make The Sanity-defying Claim That The First Strand Of DNA Arose By Natural Selection.

Has anyone ever seen proof of evolution?

Who Could Even Believe Such a Thing?! No One, Really. Some People Brainwash Themselves.

There Are No Examples Of Continued Overall Increases In Complexity And Information Without Intelligence.

What is the new type of scientific method that has been developed especially for evolution?

Questions and Answers: What is the basis for your statement that no new genetic information is produced or created?

Questions and Answers: What About the Kangaroo in Australia Only? Does That Prove Evolution?

Related

Questions and Answers




































































































































































































































Recent

Home

Answer to Critic

Appeal to Possibility

Circular Reasoning

Argument to the Future

Insignificant Cause

Word Magic

Love Between a Man and Woman

Author/Compiler

Colossians 2

Righteousness & Holiness

Don't Compromise

Sin

Proof by Atheism

Scriptures About Marriage

Genuine Authority

The Reason for Rejecting Truth

Witness on the Internet

Flaky Human Reasoning

How Do You Know?



Featured


The Real Purpose of the Church

The Real Purpose of Life

From Glory to Glory

REAL Faith--What it IS & IS NOT

REAL Love--What it IS & IS NOT

How to be Led by God

How to Witness

Wisdom: Righteousness & Reality

Holiness & Mind/Soul

Redemption: Free From Sin

Real Reality

Stories Versus Revelation

Understanding Logic

Logical Fallacies

Circular Reasoning-Who is Guilty?

How Can We Know Anything?

God's Word

God's Process

God's Pattern

Mind Designed to Relate to God

Answers for the Confused

Fossil Record Says: "Creation"

Avoid These Pitfalls

Public School's Religion

Twisting Science

Evolutionism

Public School Failures

Twisting History


How can we know anything about anything? That's the real question

more info: mouseover or click

The complexity of Gods Way understood in a single diagram
Obey your flesh and descend into darkness