Riffing off of Ed’s post on Stephen Meyers, which I can’t link because the site suddenly won’t let me, and it probably won’t let me for a very good reason. But it’s just creationist clown Stephen Meyers pitching the tired old creationist argument about “No New Info.” If you haven’t ever seen that one, it basically claims that nature cannot produce “new information.” And since the field of analytical information theory is even more obscure and specialized than the other popular fields of twisted creationist swindles like the one misusing thermodynamics. No one wants to get in the weeds on it. That’s one of the reasons creationists like to use it.
It happens that this argument is easy to disprove, in the formal sense, as in disproven to a 100% metaphysical certainty. And all you need to understand the shape of that proof is a firm grasp on what Less Than, and More Than, mean in elementary arithmetic.
Assume a genome replicating to form a daughter, and an information metric in which the terms ‘more’ info or ‘less’ info exist. If a single random mutation occurred between parent and daughter, creationists would say it must have less information. Now assume a back mutation when the daughter replicates which reversing the original mutation, thus restoring it to the exact same state as the parent. Nice huh?
In other words, if what creationists claim is true, it becomes possible for a genome — and by extension an organism — to have less, or more, information than itself, at least as defined by any genetic characteristics, which is a clear violation of one of the fundamental requirements of any metric set.