http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/Dawkins_could_not_give_an_exam...
Creationists are an extreme example of the psychological finding that brains are excellent at amplifying the currently held beliefs no matter which data it is fed by cherry picking just the notions that support the belief system.
The corollary of this is that it is pointless to argument with creationists.
Once I understood this cherry picking done automatically by brains I realized that lots of popular religious material is probably not created by malicious omission of facts but by just simply ... processing information in academically non-rigorous manner.
Like editing video to convey the message the original authors wish to convey, for example.
I found this by Googling for, "dawkins give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome". It was the top result.
Y'know, we live in an age of unprecedented access to information. It really is remarkable. At no time in human history has more information been more available to more people for less effort. Why, in this age, would you want to remain willfully ignorant?
Literally any mutation that adds at least one base to the DNA chain.
That being said adding information may or may not result in beneficial traits.
Can someone address this? I've seen this put forth by many and Dawkins sounds very, very confused and completely avoids the question.