The abstracts from the papers are freely available at no cost. It is not my intent to ridicule, just state the case plainly. No offence is intended. Your questions about "information" are a rehash of points debated a few years ago (and I've lost my references) and they've been thoroughly thrashed out. A precise definition of information may have helped earlier but I think your use of the word is consistent with your argument so there is no need to descend into discussions of semantics. My difficulty is that I cannot see the rationale of doubting the plausibility of increasing complexity and information when all other mechanisms are accepted. Especially when the evidence is all around us. What is the alternative? God did it! I'm not being flippant, but serious. Is this a discussion about god’s position - the god of gaps?