That evolution exists as a fact is undeniable.
Hard to deny something undefined. Is it about the origin of species or not?
Despite all the double-speak from its proponents, evolution is about origins, until someone gets his feet held to the fire, then it isn't about origins. It's just about natural selection, the definition of which changes just as much.
Duh.....DNA is the source of information transmission for all life. It is what drives evolution.
No. Natural selection drives it, or so they say in the old tautology "survival of the fittest."
That evolution exists as a fact is undeniable.
You see, this is where one must insist on definitions. Notice that the word "definite" employs the same root.
Everyone talks about bacteria, but bacteria do not evolve. It's like the old Peppered Moth example. Where sooty trees made the white ones more visible to predators, black ones became more numerous. See? they say, the moth "evolved." What wasn't told is that the Peppered Moth had black and white varieties in the beginning, and still do. So the Peppered Moth didn't change at all. The numbers of black and white ones changed. The demographics changed. So now, a mere change in demographics is evolution.
That's what's going on with bacteria populations. They don't make new DNA to become resistant to vaccines. The unresistant individuals (we'll call them white ones) are killed leaving only the resistant ones (we'll call them black) to reproduce. The bacteria don't change, the numbers of black and white ones change. The demographics changed. That's what happens with every population. No new genetic information is created. Ever.
It isn't evolution at all. We shouldn't even call it "micro" evolution, because that creates the notion in the head of the average Joe that new DNA is being created, even if he doesn't think of it in those terms. And indeed, that is exactly what the Naturalistic biologists (who rule the sciences these days) want Joe to think when he hears the word evolution. Don't be fooled by words of art and slight of hand in cleverly devised attempts to trick informed skeptics. Evolution is indeed about creation.
DNA is what makes the changes.
Again, to be accurate it must be expressed in the passive tense. DNA is what is changed. DNA doesn't change itself.
what is the nature of those changes. Is information gained or lost? In the case of Darwin's finches, a certain variation of beak was completely bread out of a population. Genetic information was lost. It is never gained. Ever. (Transduction notwithstanding.)
what is behind the genetic changes.....
In every textbook, it's natural selection. In every textbook, that is what changed monkeys to men. (And, yes, nodak, if our ancestors are said to have been ape-like, then they were frickin' apes.)
Now, the driving force behind evolution might be
your question, but don't pretend you will be regarded as a scientist for posing that question, because
they don't pose that question. You only pose that question because Scripture can be wrested only so far before an overt and outright denial thereof is unavoidable. They already know what drives it. But what they will do is pat you on the head for being a good little boy to not challenge their presuppositions, nor to expose their disingenuous presentation of the evidence.
that is where ones faith or lack thereof comes into play.
And this is the old ploy of the philosophical Naturalist (notice the capital N). By faith, he really means God. And by god, the Naturalist doesn't mean a deity, but something for which, for now, they have no explanation. And one only gets to say "god" according to their rules.
quantum is being a good boy.
