Sciencescience

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 04:08 PM

New Study Confirms Harmful Role of Mutations


BY JEFFREY P. TOMKINS, PH.D. * | MONDAY, APRIL 10, 2017

The traditional evolutionary model states that organisms evolve by random mutations. These mutations somehow provide new genetic information leading to novel traits that can be selected upon by the environment. Not only does this speculative paradigm lack empirical support, but documented beneficial mutations are exceedingly rare. Now, a new study shows mutations that commonly arise during cell division are not only unhelpful, but instead are highly correlated with cancer.1

Many tissues in the body need to regenerate themselves or replenish other types of cells, such as blood cells produced from bone marrow. This process is accomplished through stem cells. Researchers previously documented that the lifetime risk of cancer among 25 different tissue types is strongly associated with the total number of times the stem cells in those same tissues divide to make new cells.2 In addition, it is also known that about three mutations occur every time a cell divides.3 These mutations arise in the form of copying errors during the process of DNA replication.

In the grand evolutionary story, DNA copying errors will somehow lead to new mutations in the germline stem cells that make sperm and eggs so these mutations will be heritable. But do such DNA copying errors occasionally lead to beneficial mutations, or are the odds stacked against such naturalistic optimism? While this new study doesn't evaluate germline stem cells, it does take a close look at stem cell division in general, and the odds are not in favor of evolution.

The data in this new study show a strong correlation between cancer incidence and normal stem cell divisions in human tissue samples from eight different countries across the globe. The strong association was detected regardless of the environment in which the subjects lived. This major role of DNA replication mutations in cancer was supported by using cancer genome DNA sequencing and epidemiological data. Results indicated that DNA copying errors are responsible for two-thirds of the mutations in human cancers!

These data not only show the futility of invoking mutation as an engine of evolution, but also add support to the fact the human genome is degrading—devolving—not evolving and improving over time. Cornell University geneticist Dr. John Sanford demonstrated this process of genetic entropy through a variety of studies.4

The original humans, Adam and Eve, were created with error-free genomes that contained no mutations. Then, as recorded in Genesis 3, sin entered the world through Adam’s disobedience and the whole creation was subject to the curse. The veracity of the human genome has been incessantly degrading ever since.

Humans, and the rest of biological creation, are not gradually evolving better genomes over time. In fact, the empirically observed mutation rates we have seen in a variety of creatures match the biblical model and timeframe.4,5 The facts of science we are now documenting in the genome with modern technology profoundly support the Bible, not the failed naturalistic speculations of mankind.

References

Tomasetti, C., L. Li, and B. Vogelstein. 2017. Stem cell divisions, somatic mutations, cancer etiology, and cancer prevention. Science. 355 (6331): 1330–1334.
Tomasetti, C., and B. Vogelstein. 2015. Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions. Science. 347 (6217): 78-81.
Tomasetti, C., B. Vogelstein, and G. Parmigiani. 2013. Half or more of the somatic mutations in cancers of self-renewing tissues originate prior to tumor initiation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 110 (6): 1999–2004.
Tomkins, J. P. 2014. Genetic Entropy Points to a Young Creation. Acts & Facts. 43 (11): 16.
Tomkins, J. P. 2015. Genetic Clocks Verify Recent Creation. Acts & Facts. 44 (12): 9-11.
*Dr. Tomkins is Director of Life Sciences at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his Ph.D. in genetics from Clemson University.

40 replies, 964 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply New Study Confirms Harmful Role of Mutations (Original post)
nolidad Jul 2018 OP
Shkreli Jul 2018 #1
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #2
nolidad Jul 2018 #7
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #3
nolidad Jul 2018 #4
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #5
nolidad Jul 2018 #6
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #8
nolidad Jul 2018 #9
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #10
nolidad Jul 2018 #12
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #15
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #11
nolidad Jul 2018 #13
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #14
nolidad Jul 2018 #16
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #17
nolidad Jul 2018 #18
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #19
nolidad Jul 2018 #21
Meowmenow Jul 2018 #20
nolidad Jul 2018 #22
nolidad Jul 2018 #23
MumblyPeg Jul 2018 #24
nolidad Jul 2018 #27
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #25
nolidad Jul 2018 #28
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #30
nolidad Jul 2018 #31
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #32
nolidad Jul 2018 #33
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #34
Cold Warrior Jul 2018 #35
SatansSon666 Jul 2018 #36
nolidad Jul 2018 #37
Cold Warrior Jul 2018 #39
nolidad Jul 2018 #40
nolidad Jul 2018 #38
Micrometer Jul 2018 #26
nolidad Jul 2018 #29

Response to nolidad (Original post)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 04:15 PM

1. The last two paragraphs were like

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shkreli (Reply #1)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 05:11 PM

2. lol, no shit.

I haven't read genesis in a while, but I don't remember the bit about "error-free genomes that contained no mutations".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shkreli (Reply #1)

Tue Jul 17, 2018, 03:05 PM

7. Well if you have info showing the human genome is getting better

I am all ears!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 05:15 PM

3. Only a loon would use a paper on genetic research of cancer

and turn it into a lame blog post about Adam and Eve.
That PHD is certainly paying off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #3)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 06:24 PM

4. Well as you are incapable to rebut the science he writes on

All you can do is to try to lower this guy so you can see above him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #4)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 06:44 PM

5. Did you read the papers he referenced?

How do you know he's reporting what it really says?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 17, 2018, 03:04 PM

6. Did you ?

If you think he is lying then go for it!

But i t is a common fact that cellular mutation is the prime cause of cancer. Kind of tough to have it be the prime cause of lethal diseases and advancement in information and form.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #6)

Tue Jul 17, 2018, 04:35 PM

8. Of course it can be both.

Cancer is bad, but a mutation that gives you extra strong bones is good.
A mutation that allows you to be better equipped for higher altitudes is good.
Not every mutation causes cancer.
You gotta stop listening to the loons man.
They making you look bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #8)

Wed Jul 18, 2018, 05:20 PM

9. Ahh!

First off you are not talking about mutations but simply adaptation with existing material. There are enormous ways to build strong bones!

Yes there are mutations (or variations or even recombinant genetics) that allow for creatures to live in unique climates!

But those are specialized environments and if the adapted return to a more normal environment that their type lives in normally they are at a distinct disadvantage and tend to die out because they cannot compete.

Anti-biotic resistant bacteria thrive in an antibiotic environment, but when returned to a "normal" environment they are at a disadvantage and die out!

E-coli in a lab learned to eat a citrate solution after 40,000 generations. It was a protein that turned on! It has an advantage in that citrate rich environment, but when returned to its "normal" environment it dies out and the normal e-coli thrive!
Also they cannot point to a mutation that added new material to a genome or increased the complexity of a genome as more to a creature obereying Mendels law and variation of existing genetic material.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #9)

Thu Jul 19, 2018, 09:09 AM

10. Extra strong bones isn't a mutation?

Of course it is. You are forbidden to admit it is a good mutation, so you have to call it an adaptation. Replacing words doesn't change what it really is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #10)

Thu Jul 19, 2018, 05:54 PM

12. Well mR. science guy:

did they rule out diet? You know like the commercials to drink milk for strong bones?

Did they rule out that it is within the limits of bone structure of the creature involved?

Did they rule out that the proteins for coding stronger bones did not exist already? YIOu know a ssuppressed coding!

How extra strong? What is the norm for that creature ? what is the normal variation in bone density for that crteature?

These are all important facts that have to be determined before we say we have a real mutation and not a simple expression or variation.

But let us assume you have found a real natural "good" mutation that is not tied to a unique environment.

Now you are down to about 9,999,999,999,999 good mutations needed to get from that original goo to you!

I can empirically show how nearly everymutation ever seen and recorded are on the harmful side of the scale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #12)

Fri Jul 20, 2018, 04:13 AM

15. It's a mutation.

That is passed down. It's not just one person.
Maybe look it up and find the answers to your questions.
Your evidence? Lmao.
Like your list of scientists that don't accept evolution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Thu Jul 19, 2018, 04:44 PM

11. New Study Confirms Harmful Role of Hammers.

 

The traditional model states that hammers are useful tools. These tools somehow provide new joints leading to novel wooden structures . Not only does this speculative paradigm lack empirical support, but documented beneficial hammers are exceedingly rare. Now, a new study shows hammers that commonly hit victims during violent crimes are not only unhelpful, but instead are highly correlated with pain and death.1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #11)

Thu Jul 19, 2018, 05:56 PM

13. Well you get a PHD in hammerology!

But as this is genetics and molecular biology and both evolution believing and YEC believing scientists all agree that nearly every mutation (>99.94% of all known mutations) are harmful to a slioght or toxic degree- your hammerology, while appreciated is not relevant!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #13)

Thu Jul 19, 2018, 09:50 PM

14. It only takes a small change and a lot of time to make a big difference.

 

Too bad you don't believe in geological time. That really screws up your stories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #14)

Sat Jul 21, 2018, 07:56 AM

16. Well if they actually had a means of measuring long ages, but they don't.

Radiometric forms of dating have been empirically demonstrated to be fatally flawed.

Sedimentary layers have been shown to take days and weeks and not centuries and eons to form.

We YEC folk accepted @6K years by faith when it appeared evidence went against us! Now the supposed methods of evidence have been shown to be useless to accurately date anything.

Well let us consider your claim above from a scientific perspective.

What can we prove scientifically about genetic change?
1). we can prove variation within a species
2). we can prove speciation within a genus.
2a) But speciation is almost always just variation within a species but a scientist gets to name a new species.
3) better than 99.94% of all mutations fall on the harmful side of the scale. So we have a massive problem of a group of creatures having to survive a host of negative mutations to "pass on" the positive mutations.
4). The only proven "good" mutations are in unique environments , and when the creature is returned to its normal environment- it dies off.
5) We have no scientific proof of massive changes over massive time! Little changes always add up to big changes.
6) Scientific experimentation with introducing mutagenic changes in creatures have never produced a new genera. I.E. fruit fly and e-coli.
7) Even Darwin's finches have now been empirically shown to have beak size change due to normal variation due to diet (Mendels Law) and not adding new info or increased complexity through mutation .

Those are provable with science- but the goo to you by way of the zoo hypotheses is simply a statement of faith! That is okay- people can choose to believe what they wish. But Evolution fails the definition of a theory. It can only be positive but cannot be demonstrated!

What can be proven scientifically lends more credence to YEC and Divine Creation than it does to BBT and Evolution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #16)

Sat Jul 21, 2018, 10:11 AM

17. You can repeat your list of bullshit "facts" all you want

 

but only loons with no scientific literacy fall for it.

Plenty of good writers have taken the time to explain and debunk all of your idiotic ideas, go read them. And if you have already (bwahahahaha) do it AGAIN. Until you finally grasp what they are telling you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #17)

Sat Jul 21, 2018, 10:19 AM

18. Gee! What a powerful scientific rebut!

I got those out of standard textbooks!

They are facts and you say writers have debunked them- why not direct me to one of them then.

Seems all you want me to do is to blindly accept evolution based on the writing of "good writers". Well that is very subjective now isn't it.

But I challenge you to debunk just one of the 7 statements I made!

But remember ad-hominems like: "but only loons with no scientific literacy fall for it" is not evidence, but the tools fo those who are too lazy to defend their own belief system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 21, 2018, 10:41 AM

19. I am not wasting time on rebutting bullshit, I have told you that. Plenty of others have already

 

done that job. YOU are the one who blindly accepts bullshit. Evolution is based on more than a century of real scientific work, not a few loons dishonestly cherry picking and misrepresenting how science actually works.

Here you go, from simple enough for children to some of the original works:


Grandmother Fish
Your Inner Fish: A Journey Into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body
On the Origin of Species
The Selfish Gene
The Blind Watchmaker
The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex
The Ancestor's Tale
The Voyage of the Beagle
The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
Why Evolution Is True
Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History
Climbing Mount Improbable
The Third Chimpanzee
Darwin's Dangerous Idea
The Structure of Evolutionary Theory
The Extended Phenotype
Genome: The Autobiography of a Species In 23 Chapters
River Out of Eden
What Evolution Is
The Moral Animal
Ever Since Darwin: Reflections in Natural History
The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature
The Making of the Fittest
The Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in Our Time
The Origins of Virtue
Endless Forms Most Beautiful
Only A Theory
Finding Darwin's God
Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea
The 10,000 Year Explosion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #19)

Mon Jul 23, 2018, 05:31 PM

21. Well I shall chalk you up as a waste of good oxygen in trying to discuss with you.

Your ability to want to discuss on a discussion site is underwhelming.

Bit I have just one book for you that would give you the eternal answers that mattrer most in all fields of study:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #18)

Sat Jul 21, 2018, 10:48 AM

20. Here, maybe this is more your level.

 

I haven't ready any of these, but maybe they can help you.

https://www.the-best-childrens-books.org/charles-darwin-evolution.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #20)

Mon Jul 23, 2018, 05:32 PM

22. Thanks but fiction is not my thing unless it is Tom Clancy!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #20)

Mon Jul 23, 2018, 05:47 PM

23. Poor meow!

Believes in a philosophy but yet they do not have one piece of verified evidence that mutations have ever in natural conditions ever produced new information previously not found in the genome nor added complexity to a genome ever!!!!

But that doesn't matter- because evolution keeps you from having to realize you are accountable to a Holy and Loving God! We are all guilty in HIs sight and He has made a way for you to escape the consequences of your own sin! Evolution is genetically impossible! That is why the greatest defections from the philosophy of evolution comes from geneticists, micro biologists. but that is okay! this is not about whether evolution is valid or not- for it isn't! It is about two opposing worldviews! And I do think you are savvy enough to know that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #23)

Mon Jul 23, 2018, 07:29 PM

24. some thin-skinned pansy lefty alerted on this. bad faith alert too

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MumblyPeg (Reply #24)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 12:23 PM

27. Well I have had one post removed

and it deserved to be so, I had a bad day and let it bleed into my writing.

I am surprised I haven't been alerted on a whole lot more. Maybe I have and haven't been told.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #23)

Mon Jul 23, 2018, 08:00 PM

25. lmao.. poor nolidad.

It's not a worldview. Another made up bullshit word to project your faults onto people you disagree with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #25)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 12:24 PM

28. Yeah it is, and I suspect you know it is!

It fails to satisfy even the basic definition of a scientific theory!

It is part of a belief system. Once again BBT and the hypothesis of EVolution are the books of Genesis for the secular atheistic worldview!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #28)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 01:22 PM

30. BBT and ToE have absolutely nothing to do with atheism.

Absolutely nothing.
You should know that.
You said you studied the theory of evolution for 10 years.

So as you rummaged through the data and published papers on the topic, how many times did the scientists mention gods?
After 10 years of studying published papers..
How many times?
I'll venture a guess.
Fucking zero.
Zero times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #30)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 04:34 PM

31. I know of no atheist who believes in creation ex-deo.

The humanist manifesto also declares evolution is the means by which things came into existence.

You are ewither deliberately foolish or extremely naive to not think they are tied together in the war of worldviews!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #31)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 05:39 PM

32. What about Christians

That accept evolution?
What side of the "war" are they on?
The pope.
What side is he on?
Even the pope knows an ICR or AiG loon when he sees one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #32)

Fri Jul 27, 2018, 05:24 PM

33. Well for eternity they are on the right side!

But as far as defending the Word of God- they have compromised over "science falsely so called".

The Pope? Don't know don't care! He doesn't represent me nor do I agree with about 80% of his public pronouncements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #33)

Fri Jul 27, 2018, 05:46 PM

34. So would you say the pope is going to heaven?

You said it's a war, so whose side is the pope on?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #34)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 01:46 AM

35. Losing argument on your part

The Creationist’s answer your question, once they get beyond their coyness of “only God decides that,” will be a resounding NO.


https://www.chick.com/m/articles/pope-francis-the-white-knight-to-save-the-world.asp

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #35)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 07:32 AM

36. It kinda seems like nolidad decides.

He knows who is going to hell and heaven.
He's got it all figured out.
I figure the pope would be on his side, but only nolidad gets to decide that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #36)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 02:35 PM

37. Once again you take my words and twist them !

I am not surprised!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #36)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 02:43 PM

39. Our friend is flailing about a bit tonight

Lots of illogical, non-responsive replies. Perhaps he’s savouring the day when others will come to judgement.

https://m.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #39)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 03:50 PM

40. No, if you die in your present state of rejecting Christ,

it will bring me no joy to see you condemned forever!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold Warrior (Reply #35)

Sat Jul 28, 2018, 02:36 PM

38. Well if they are a Creationist they should know

what is the requirement to get to heaven.

It is not a belief in Creation
It is not piety
It is not enough good works
It is not praying a bunch!
It is not agreeing with me!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Tue Jul 24, 2018, 06:00 AM

26. Remember that evolutionary change is not limited to mutations,

Remember that evolutionary change is not limited to mutations,
but also is influenced by selection and genetic drift.
Selective agents (e.g. predation, climate, etc.) can lead to rapid evolution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #26)

Wed Jul 25, 2018, 12:36 PM

29. But what is genetic drift if not a mutated change in the genome

in a species or genera.

Natural selection can only take what is presented to it and either preserve the fire and extinct or reduce the unfit. It has no mind. design.plan or intent nor is it capable of directing! It is just a process

You : Selective agents (e.g. predation, climate, etc.) can lead to rapid evolution.

CAN is the big word!! Now show when it did!! and then we have something tangible to discuss.

I know the hypothesis is that when a predator picks of slower running prey- the prey left produce faster offspring. Well maybe- or maybe not. Speed is not necessarily a genetic trait. All animals have speed ranges in their genome. However, even if true which no one has demonstrated- all it would do is make a faster say deer! It is not making it something that is becoming not a deer!

Genetic drift (allelemorph) may produce variants in the species such as different hair or eye color height and similar things- but they are just expressions within the kind! Most of these "mutations"are actually the result of suppressed genes being expressed or as Mendel described it recessive genes becoming dominant!

These do not produce the massive genetic change that supposedly causes a theropod to become an avian.

or a fish to an amphibian.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Sciencescience