[GodGunsGuts]

==For example a couple mutations in a gene on an esterase plasmid in a bacteria enabled the new enzyme to digest nylon.

There is no gain of information. The bacteria are merely drawing upon was already frontloaded by the Creator. As Dr. Sanford points out in his book Genetic Entropy, virtually all beneficial mutations are the result of information loss, not information gain—just as predicted by the creation model.

[allmendream]

The ability to change was “front loaded” into EVERY bit of DNA. That was all that was needed, was the ability to change into something else that was also useful, that is a gain of information.

You are attempting a ‘there are no changes that are beneficial, and any changes that are beneficial were “front-loaded’ defense.

It is either...

a) no gain of information is possible

or

b) gain of information is possible

The fact that you want to tack onto b) ‘but only if the information was “front-loaded’ is inconsequential.

It is either a) or b).

Obviously you just admitted to b) which makes your a) statement no longer “operable” as the Clinton White House used to say.

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

There is no gain of information. The bacteria are merely drawing upon was already frontloaded by the Creator.

If that's the case, why did it take more than 30,000 generations for that frontloaded information to kick in?

And given that this information is already there, it seems that it would be a productive use of creation scientists' time to try and figure out where it's located. Furthermore, since they're so big on being able to predict stuff, maybe after they locate it they could look for some other new abilities the Creator frontloaded and devise experiments to see if they kick in or not.