Evolving Useful Bacteria
(...) genetic engineers have developed a new technique known as MAGE – multiplex automated genome engineering. What they do is to essentially evolve bacteria with optimized or at least greatly improved production of the substance of interest. The technique causes bacteria to rapidly mutate – causing thousands of mutations and billions of different strains. (...)
The MAGE technique is also interesting because it is a direct application of evolutionary principles. The process works by increasing diversity randomly through mutations and then selecting those bacteria that by chance have the desirable trait. This clearly demonstrates that the two step process of evolution – random diversity and selection – works.
Creationists have argued that evolution cannot work because random mutation cannot provide specificity and direction, and that selection cannot increase information because it is a negative process – it only removes information. This argument is nothing but a diversion from logic and reality, however. It should be obvious that mutations increase information and selection provides non-random specificity and direction.
In response to MAGE as an example of evolutionary principles, creationists are likely to argue that the MAGE technique allows for the inclusion of genetic mutations already known to be desirable into the mix – including introducing genes from other species. So the diversity does not have to be entirely random. But even when it is, the process still works. Also, the selection is artifical, not natural. This is an old objection by creationists to artifical selection as an anology of evolution. This is a non sequitur, however – the analogy is that selection can drive non-random change in a randomly varying system. It doesn’t matter if the selection is artificial or natural, all that matters is differential survival.
By itself, of course, MAGE does not prove that evolution is true. No single line of evidence can do this. But is does support basic evolutionary principles with a practical application. Creationists often charge that evolution has no practical application, as if utility is a marker of scientific truth. Not only is this argument fallacious, it is factually incorrect. Creationists excel at being wrong in two or more ways simultaneously. At least they are good at something.
