Throughout the history we kept discovering patterns in things we thought were random. The trend is, understanding reveals patterns, so may be when we say something is random, that just mean we don't understand it enough?

But then this is only a futile guess at what God's perception would be like.

I'd say "God does not play dice". Technologies have helped us see patterns in what we thought were random events. Like, migration patterns of some animals, DNA pattern, etc.

The more we understand, the more we see that things aren't so random as we thought they were.

I am aware of this. I wrote in an article recently:
<ul>
<li>Information is always the result of an intelligence</li>
<li>Loss of information can mean improved fitness within a specific environment, that is loss of function can result in improved likelihood of survival.</li>
<li>Lost information cannot be recovered without reintroduction of the same information (save trivial examples) by breeding or design</li>
</ul>

This last point mentioned trivial examples like your claim above. But usually the G to A mutation is a reversion of the previous mutation. That is you start with high information, you lose this degree of information by a minor mutation, thus you have less information. The reversion back is just to what you started with.

But the fact that a copy of Hamlet has a minor misprint, and in photocopying the play the misprint is misprinted to look like the original word is a far cry from coming up with Hamlet from nothing!

I stand by my claim that information does not come from non-information. Examples that show change in enzyme activity always show a decreased specificity for the substrate compared with the original enzyme and the original enzyme's substrate.

If these examples start with high information and end up with less information, how worse is the case when you start with non-information.

(Matt, this is getting a little off topic, let us know if this debate is for another thread).

Personally I have no problem with the idea that our evolution has been guided.

But here is an interesting thought.  Is God not also master over chance?  What does it mean for things to be 'random' in a world sustained by God.  I am not sure it a contradiction to say that a process in completely random and at the same time completely controlled by God.

Thoughts?

Hell no.

All I wanted was CommentLuv and I ended up with this nightmare and now CommenLuv no longer works and getting rid of JS Kit from my blogger template would be very difficult as its coding is riddled through the html.

I would have moved us today but for today being one of the worst pain days I've had in a long time.

because there won't be any of this nasty JS at all? *fingers crossed*

here is one page on the RNA world hypothesis which includes references to some of the key early papers, just this year we had an example of an RNA enzyme evoling into a a system that can self-replicate indefinately without the aid of anything else in the cell…

<span>Bethyada,</span>

<span>Increased fitness may not be increased information. Mutation tends to lead to decreased specificity of enzyme. </span>

So, if a mutaton from A to G can decrease information then it follows the back mutation, G to A will increase it. Mutation can increase information. If specificity in that enzyme if a good thing in the present environment mutation stands a good chance of being  fixed. Evolution can increase the information in a species genome. Thank you and good night.

I agree if people were to claim that 'evolution showed Martian's are not constantly modifying life on earth, then they would need a cogent argument from evolutionary theory to this conclusion.

Of course the failure to do this does not mean Martians exist, or that they are not other reasons for thinking this is not the case. It does show however that evolutionary theory does not provide grounds for the conclusion.