I was wrong: the new article at the ICR is not what I thought it would be. Instead, it’s called Evolution of Life Research Close to Creation, and is about a paper in the Journal of the Royal Society Interface called “The algorithmic origins of life.” For some other resources on the paper, you can read the press release, an article by the main author of the paper (Sara Walker) on her site, another essay by Walker, this blog post, or the Evolution News and Views post about it. There’s also a video of a lecture by Walker, which I am yet to finish. Please read at least some of those – I’m not going to be able to give you a good summary below, and neither does Brian. Continue reading
Approximately two weeks ago you might have heard of a story about the storage of an entire genetics textbook in DNA – quite a feat. Today, Brian Thomas writes Scientists Store 70 Billion Books on DNA. If 70 billion sounds like a bit much, note that numerous duplicates were needed to avoid errors – that, and the researches were trying for a record.
The reason why Thomas chose to write about this subject can be summed up with this quote:
There is no material that has as much data storage density as DNA. It is better than blue-ray discs, hard drives, and even flash drives. The Science report shows that DNA is six powers of ten denser than flash drive technology.
The sheer superiority of DNA as a data storage medium is strong evidence for its supernatural creation.
I could discuss the flaws in this article – talking about what data storage actually means, and probably mentioning along the way how it does not logically follow that the best data storage system must be created by something supernatural. But that would be unnecessary and pointless, because it’s simply not true that DNA is the absolute best medium around when it comes to storage density. Continue reading
In the most recent(ly discovered by me) article by Brian Thomas, Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria Shows Adaptive Design, we have the creationist explanation for why Antibiotic resistance is not, apparently, evidence (if not confirmation) for evolution. The article, coincidentally, is very similar to the most recent DpSU I wrote about, which was about the evolution (or ‘adaptation’ to Mr Thomas) of yeast. While this is not a DpSU, if you placed this among 9 articles that were you couldn’t pick it out.
Mr Thomas begins:
Bacterial survival in antibiotics has been taken as proof of evolution in action. But in-depth studies of the specific mechanisms for antibiotic resistance in bacteria show that no evolutionary processes are involved. One recent study even mentioned the possibility that bacteria are able to fine-tune the shapes of their own biochemicals in order to circumvent the harmful effects of antibiotics.
This is a big claim. No evolutionary processes? So the image to the right is incorrect, and there is no selection stage? Interesting… Continue reading