His arguments concerning the metrics of complexity and information
in biological systems are faulty and self-contradictory. I've even
provided examples which fit his multiple definitions of "biological
information". We've discussed all this previously on this board about
a year ago.
Although it may seem trivial, the easiest example of demonstrating
that a *single* point mutation can "result in an increase in genomic
information" (Spetner's definition, not mine), is a reverse-mutation,
which converts a mutated base in a non-functional gene back to the
original base. After all, if a point mutation which wipes out the
function of a gene is described as losing information, how would we
describe a reverse-mutation which perfectly restores the original
sequence?
My take on the book: Only good for people like me who tend to
collect books related to the C/E controversy. I wouldn't buy it
for its scientific or intellectual development, which is questionable
at best.
Regards,
Tim Ikeda
tikeda@sprintmail.hormel.com