I just noticed that Bio-Complexity 2025 has a couple of articles up.
The first is by William Dembski, and begins thus:
Conservation of information sparked scientific interest once a recurring pattern was noticed in the evolutionary computing literature. In grappling with the creation of information through evolutionary algorithms, this literature consistently revealed that the information outputted by such algorithms always needed first to be programmed into them.
That’s simply not true. Creationist and ID literature made that claim, but it was soundly refuted - here, for example, where Sal Cordova insisted that a genetic algorithm (GA) was only regurgitating what was programmed into it, but failed to find the solution that the GA found despite having the code. Neither Cordova, Ewert or Dembski himself have ever explained how a programmer can smuggle into a GA something that they don’t know, or why, if GAs have information smuggled into them, they don’t always produce the same answer.
The paper is full of the usual rubbish about Weasel programs, evolving words, Axe’s work, etc etc etc. At 58 pages long, life is too short to waste reading this.