Discovering the Divine: Unveiling More-or-Less Information for Christian Growth

More or Less Information in Biology

One of the key arguments made by creationists relates to the concept of information in biology. While creationists acknowledge that living things change and even speciate, they argue that the changes commonly referred to as "evolution" do not actually involve the increase in information content required for microbes-to-man evolution. To understand this argument, it is important to define what we mean by information in biology.

In biology, information can be understood as the encoded instructions stored in DNA that guide the development and functioning of living organisms. DNA contains the genetic information necessary for the growth, reproduction, and survival of organisms. It is like a blueprint that determines the characteristics and traits of an organism.

Comparing Sequences

To illustrate the concept of information content, let's compare two DNA sequences:

Sequence 1: cag tgt ctt ggg ttc tcg cct gac tac gag acg cgt ttg tct tta cag gtc ctc ggc cag cac ctt aga caa gca ccc ggg acg cac ctt tca gtg ggc act cat aat ggc gga gta cca agg agg cac ggt cca ttg ttt tcg ggc cgg cat tgc tca tct ctt gag att tcc ata ctt

Sequence 2: tgg agt tct aag aca gta caa ctc tgc gac cgt gct ggg gta gcc act tct ggc cta atc tac gtt aca gaa aat ttg agg ttg cgc ggt gtc ctc gtt agg cac aca cgg gtg gaa tgg ggg tct ctt acc aaa ggg ctg ccg tat cag gta cga cgt agg tat tgc cgt gat aga ctg

To determine which sequence carries more information, we need to understand their functions. If the functions of these sequences are different, comparing their information content would be meaningless. It would be like comparing the information content of 60 grams of an apple to 60 grams of an orange.

However, if the sequences have similar functions, we can compare their information content. Let's consider an analogy using English sentences:

Sentence 1: She has a yellow vehicle. Sentence 2: She has a yellow car.

Both sentences are in English. While the first sentence is longer (25 characters), the second sentence contains more information because it is more specific (referring to a car rather than any type of vehicle). Specificity is one measure of information content. It relates to the purpose and meaning of the information, not just the size or way it is expressed.

Levels of Information Content

According to Dr. Werner Gitt, an information scientist, there are five levels of information content:

1. Statistics: This level involves symbols and their frequencies.
2. Syntax: It refers to patterns of arrangement of symbols.
3. Semantics: This level deals with the meaning of the information.
4. Pragmatics: It relates to the function or outcome resulting from the information.
5. Apobetics: This level focuses on the purpose, plan, or design behind the information.

Specificity, which we discussed earlier, falls under the semantics, pragmatics, or apobetics level.

Gitt's Theorem 9 states that "Only that which contains semantics is information." Many evolutionists make the mistake of limiting information measurement to the statistical level or "Shannon information." However, Shannon information only measures the minimum number of characters needed to represent a sequence, regardless of whether it is meaningful or not. Meaningless sequences can have more Shannon information than meaningful sentences in a recognized language.

Comparing the Sequences' Information Content

Assuming that the two sequences we are comparing may be meaningful, let's evaluate their information content.

Both sequences contain the same amount of statistical information when represented in text, with 240 characters each. At the syntactical level, both sequences consist of 60 triplets composed of the symbols c, a, t, and g.

At the semantic level, we recognize that these triplets represent DNA bases that code for specific amino acids. Since all 64 possible triplets have a meaning in the DNA code, and neither sequence contains any of the three "stop codes," both sequences could be considered to have the same amount of information at the semantic level. If processed by the appropriate genetic machinery, both sequences could potentially produce a protein chain consisting of 60 amino acids.

However, when it comes to the pragmatics level, it appears that both sequences carry no meaningful information. Without being able to locate these sequences in any online gene libraries, it is challenging to determine their specific functions or outcomes.

At the apobetics level, which focuses on purpose or design, we have no idea what outcomes would result from processing these sequences. If they are indeed random sequences, processing them into proteins in living cells would likely lead to destructive outcomes since random changes tend to be harmful rather than beneficial.

It is also important to note that the final protein configuration resulting from a particular DNA sequence is influenced by cellular machines called chaperonins. These chaperonins play a crucial role in ensuring proper protein folding. Without them, an amino acid chain produced from a DNA sequence may misfold into harmful prions instead of correctly forming the needed protein. This misfolding is associated with fatal brain conditions such as Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease.

Additionally, each creature has its own unique set of cellular machinery, which means that the outcomes resulting from the reading of these genetic sequences could vary significantly depending on the organism. For example, the same genetic sequence found in the HIV virus may be harmless when read by ape cells but lethal when read by human cells. These different outcomes at the apobetics level highlight the importance of considering the specific genetic machinery of each organism.

Why This Matters

Understanding the concept of information in biology is crucial for evaluating evolutionary claims. Creationists argue that the increase in information required for microbes-to-man evolution has not been observed. Instead, they propose that changes in living organisms involve loss or rearrangement of existing information rather than the generation of new information.

By considering the different levels of information content and their significance, creationists challenge the notion that random mutations and natural selection can generate the complexity and diversity of life as observed today. They argue that such processes tend to lead to harmful outcomes rather than beneficial ones.

Think About It

1. How would you define "information" in biology? Can you think of any everyday examples that illustrate this concept?
2. Do you find it convincing that random mutations and natural selection can generate new information? Why or why not?
3. Consider the five levels of information content proposed by Dr. Werner Gitt. How do these levels help us understand the complexity and purpose in living organisms?
4. Reflect on the role of chaperonins in protein folding and its implications for proper functioning and survival. Can you think of any real-world examples that demonstrate the importance of proper protein folding?

For more in-depth articles on information in living organisms, you can explore our website's Frequently Asked Questions index under the topic "Information Theory."

Original Article: Feedback archive → Feedback 2007