Information, Probability and DNA- Responding to Smilodon's Retreat
Smilodon's Retreat has a recent post titled Information, Probability, and DNA. In it the author attempts to poke holes in the argument from probabilities wrt DNA sequences. The author's first mistake was pointing to the genetic code as his position doesn't have anything to explain its existence. That isn't the entire problem. In order to function the genetic code requires several macromolecular machines. But I digress...
And that’s interesting, because you can make some pretty massive changes to that DNA sequence and still get the exact same protein.Actually you can get the same amino acid sequence but we already know that so-called silent mutations, mutations that change the codon sequence but not the represented amino acid, can change the protein, ie the folded shape that allows for functionality.
The author babbles on about that proteins are able to withstand variation and still perform the same function. Does this moron not understand that his position requires variation that leads to new functions and forms? But that isn't even the point.
The point is the only reason probability arguments exist is due to the fact that the author's position doesn't have any way to scientifically test its claims. And if you ask me his position doesn't even deserve a seat at probability discussions.