I believe that when a set of chromosomes is copied and retained it is called ‘polyploidy’. This is merely a ‘duplication’ of information but it does give an extra opportunity for mutations to occur. If this mechanism was a factor in the evolution of life we would expect life forms with the most DNA to be at a great advantage for upward evolutionary change. However, man has only 46 chromosomes (yet we are most advanced), butterflies have 380, a fern (plant) has 1200. It doesn’t seem to add up.
I've never heard of the antarctic fish that survives through 'antifreeze' proteins in the blood. I have heard of another 'beneficial' mutation to cave fish, they are blind. This is often used as proof for evolution as they are descendants from 'seeing' fish and there is no use for sight in their lightless environment. However, this again is a downward change. The eyeless fish even have an advantage over the others. This is because, as fish bump into rocks and cave walls in the darkness, the eyed ones would be likely to injure their eyes. The delicate tissue of eyes is prone to injury, which would allow harmful bacteria to enter, leading to infection and often death. The eyed fish would thus have a lesser chance of surviving to produce offspring. Those fish carrying the ‘eyeless’ genetic defect would have a greater chance of passing it on to the next generation. After many generations one would expect to observe more eyeless fish than fish with eyes, which is exactly what we do observe. Phew.
By the way, I believe in evolution. I believe in increases in genetic information but I don't believe we know how they occur. My theory is that this is inextricably linked to increases in levels of consciousness.
