We sometimes like you use “creativity” for “innovation” or “innovation” for “creativity” but these two words contain separate meanings. Creativity is an idea, while innovation is bringing that idea to life.
Creationists view DNA including so-called, “Junk DNA” as creativity while evolutionists view junk mutations as “innovation” thus skipping the “creativity” part because evolution has no idea, because it’s considered to be a mindless process. Well, maybe not! However, evolutionists continue to seek something in mutations that can define “creativity” (without the idea part of it if that makes any sense) as found in such articles as this recent one in phys.org...”Insects show how DNA mistakes become evolutionary innovation.”
“In two recently published projects, however, scientists show how typos can indeed lead to improvements. In numerous species of insects, they document the DNA errors that led to changes that are not only beneficial but also brilliant. Various species of beetles, aphids, butterflies, and moths have independently acquired genetic errors that allow them to eat highly toxic plants and then use the toxins to defend themselves against predators.”
What did Faye Flam (the reporter) offer as proof for this assumption? Mutations (copy errors in the DNA) caused the cardenolides not to bind to the enzymes required by the insects’ sodium pump. Notice, the insects are still the same species, and there was no increase in novel genetic information, or even specified complex structures. So the mutations themselves lack the ability to explain origin like how did the sodium pump and the enzyme come into existence in the first place? Do you know what I mean?
By removing one of your fingers to slip out of the handcuffs or even removing one of your arms so your hands could never be handcuffed ever again would not be considered a new innovative mechanism but it’s only a reduced vulnerability! The article celebrated this experiment as an “evolutionary trick” that produced “convergent evolution” in different insect lineages.
The author of the article seems to forget that evolution should be producing novel information (rather than reducing a vulnerability) that leads to new species. Flam (the author of the article) could not claim that the varieties able to ingest the toxins were new species; but rather he confessed at the end, “The way new species are born is another longstanding puzzle in evolution that DNA is helping scientists to solve.” In other words, comeback for promised evidence of innovation without the idea behind it.
Where is the really big innovation attributable to mutations? Duplications are a form of mutation, but just because you get a second copy of your twitter feed, doesn’t mean the second one will evolve into a new, or better feed when cosmic rays hit it. Mutations can change existing information while decaying the information but there is no evidence that it can produce novel information!
So what creates innovation? The answer is simple, nothing creates innovation, creativity is the idea that innovation brings to life and ideas as we observe them come from intelligence! Whether it be artwork, a car engine, your computer, your smartphone, or nature itself! Without creativity there is no innovation.