So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Dawkins

[Mithcoriel]

We all know the video, I'm sure. The one where creationists ask Richard Dawkins "Can you give an example of a mutation that adds information?" and he doesn't reply for a few seconds, cause he's wondering if he should kick the creationists out. And creationist like to pretend he was stumped by the question.
So how do you answer the question, anyway? Is the answer something along the lines of "An insect species isn't immune to a pesticide, and after a mutation it is", or is it more like "An insertion (a letter is added into the DNA) or a duplication of a gene"?

 

[MRaverz]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

http://www.skeptics.com.au/publications/articles/the-information-challenge/

 

[lrkun]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

The video was edited to show that Richard Dawkins had a difficult time answering the question.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Even I could answer it on the spot:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation

 

[Case]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

42.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Nylon-eating bacteria.

 

[kenandkids]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

We all know the video, I'm sure. The one where creationists ask Richard Dawkins "Can you give an example of a mutation that adds information?" and he doesn't reply for a few seconds, cause he's wondering if he should kick the creationists out. And creationist like to pretend he was stumped by the question.
So how do you answer the question, anyway? Is the answer something along the lines of "An insect species isn't immune to a pesticide, and after a mutation it is", or is it more like "An insertion (a letter is added into the DNA) or a duplication of a gene"?

He wasn't stumped and he wasn't considering whether to kick the person out. That was edited. It is a fake video. A lie.

 

[Squawk]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

He wasn't stumped and he wasn't considering whether to kick the person out. That was edited. It is a fake video. A lie.

Creationists? Dishonesty? Never!

 

[Laurens]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Nylon-eating bacteria.

You beat me to it.

 

[Laurens]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Creationists? Dishonesty? Never!

What is the world coming to!

I love the fact that creationists are so caught often up in defending the book of Genesis that they seem to forget the commandment against lying...

 

[Mithcoriel]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

http://www.skeptics.com.au/publications/articles/the-information-challenge/

Thanks for the link. Though I'm a bit confused as to what his final answer is. He seems to stop in the middle of the explanation If I summarize it, he roughly says:
How much "information" an animal has can be imagined by thinking of how long a book describing the animal would be. (So I guess anything that would make the description book longer would "add information".) Dawkins also says that natural selection actually adds information to the gene pool, information on how to survive. But I'm confused as to how this answers which mutations in particular are "additional information".
Either way, you guys have to admit that the answer isn't as clear-cut as people always say when they point out how stupid creationists are for asking it, if Dawkins writes so many pages to answer it.

The video was edited to show that Richard Dawkins had a difficult time answering the question.

He wasn't stumped and he wasn't considering whether to kick the person out. That was edited. It is a fake video. A lie.

I know, guys. Read my post. I already know it's a hoax.
And yes, he was considering kicking them out, cause the sillyness of the question revealed them to be creationists, someone he usually doesn't give an interview to.

Even I could answer it on the spot:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation

Could you be more specific about which part of the article you'd quote to a creationist? The "gain-of-function mutation", perhaps?

Also, I asked in my original post if you'd give an example on a genetic level or on a phenotypic one, and it's interesting that Master_Ghost_Knight above answered it on a genetic level and and

Nylon-eating bacteria.

answered it on a phenotypic level, so maybe it isn't that clear after all.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

The question was. "Can you give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome?"

Well certainly. Duplication. Insertion followed by meiosis. Uneven translocation followed by meiosis where by the bigest gain is inherited. Fuson followed by meiosis. Trisomy.
Add the fact that the subsequent effects are subject to selective pressure and voilà¡. What else do you want? Actual instance were any of those have been observed? No problem, some guys at that wiki article happen to have provided some references of it.

 

[Aught3]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

I don't know what is meant by the term information in this context. Is it even a quantifiable variable in biology? I never use it.

 

[Unwardil]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

It's pretty easy to understand how information gets added into dna but because I'm not a biologist, I'll explain it in terms of language.

You have an alphabet. By it's self, it is 26 individual bits of information.

Combine letters c, a, t. Let these represent the concept of small feline animal. Individually, those letters are 3 bits of information, combined, with the proper decryption algorithm (the english language) and suddenly you have a massively complex idea.

I have described how letters become words, but that's not really what they're asking. They're really asking how do you take words and get new words.

Just from sitting here typing I instantly come up with Computer Monitor, keyboard, Video Game. All words which by themselves have different meanings, in context, the meaning changes, thus, adding information. Further more, the longer I use these compound words, the less I need to specifically define those words. If I'm talking about a computer, I don't have to say 'Computer monitor' I can simply say monitor and it means something different because of context.

Easy peasy. Any given language has a limited number of bits of information, from which you can create untold new information.

But how does a mutation account for those increases of information?

Gar, wtf, teh, lol, noob, almost all of them can probably be traced to either a typo or a subtle misunderstanding of the language or simply a way to cut corners for simplicity. Mutations of language, increasing information. DNA behaves in exactly the same way, it simply uses different mechanics.

 

[Rumraket]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Any gene duplication will be an increase in information, even if there is no subsequent modification to the copy. Even though creationists like to argue that just because you have two copies of the same message, it doesn't mean you have more information(as an objection to gene-duplications). This is manifestly wrong in information theory, since the shortest description of the information in a two-copy situation will still be longer than the shortest description of a single copy.

Take this random genetic sequence for example:
'TAC TAG TTA TAG'

Now, if you have two copies of this "gene"
'TAC TAG TTA TAG TAC TAG TTA TAG'
the shortest description becomes
2'TAC TAG TTA TAG'
which is longer than just
'TAC TAG TTA TAG'
and thus, contains more information, even though it's just the same sequence twice, because it takes more information to describe it than does a single copy. Therefore all gene duplications add information pr. definition.

 

[Case]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

I don't know what is meant by the term information in this context. Is it even a quantifiable variable in biology? I never use it.

It isn't even quantifiable in linguistics. "One information, two informations, ..." doesn't work, when people say "can you give me some additional information" they should be saying "can you tell me something about this I don't already know", et cetera. Qualifiers like "a lot, some, little" always refer to a relative 'amount' of information, never to an exact amount.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Nylon-eating bacteria.

You beat me to it.

I am surprised that I was the first one to post this.

Nylon-eating bacteria.

answered it on a phenotypic level, so maybe it isn't that clear after all.

Que?

The question was: "Can you give an example of a mutation that adds information?" Read the article. It goes over the mutations that led to nylon-eating bacteria.

 

[Mithcoriel]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Que?

The question was: "Can you give an example of a mutation that adds information?" Read the article. It goes over the mutations that led to nylon-eating bacteria.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. I wasn't saying it was a wrong answer, just that you gave a different answer than someone else, so it might not be correct how we keep mocking creationists, saying "Dawkins wasn't stumped, duh! This is such a simple and stupid question, only a creationist wouldn't know the answer!"

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Que?

The question was: "Can you give an example of a mutation that adds information?" Read the article. It goes over the mutations that led to nylon-eating bacteria.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. I wasn't saying it was a wrong answer, just that you gave a different answer than someone else, so it might not be correct how we keep mocking creationists, saying "Dawkins wasn't stumped, duh! This is such a simple and stupid question, only a creationist wouldn't know the answer!"

Okay, I understand what you are saying. The thing is that so far all the answers given, although being different, have been correct. The question asked is so simple that there are multiple correct answers for it. Nylon-eating bacteria is my favorite answer for creationists in general because it anwsers a lot of there questions.

 

[Rumraket]

Re: So what IS the answer to the question that "stumped" Daw

Yes, in a sense the question posed in the title is worded wrongly. It should be "What is AN answer to the question?" not "What is THE answer to the question?". All the ones given so far have been different, but correct ways to increase information in the genomes by mutation.