Tue Sep 11, 2018, 05:19 PM

Mutations could never bring about Darwinian Evolution.

This is the difference between doing science by consensus and allowing the scientific method to establish the basis for conclusions.

6 replies, 211 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 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Mutations could never bring about Darwinian Evolution. (Original post)
nolidad Sep 2018 OP
TendiesForBreakfast Sep 2018 #1
nolidad Sep 2018 #2
nolidad Sep 2018 #3
Micrometer Sep 2018 #4
nolidad Sep 2018 #5
Meowmenow Sep 2018 #6

Response to nolidad (Original post)

Tue Sep 11, 2018, 07:08 PM

1. Man, it's been a while since I busted this old site out.

Very large mutations are rare, but mutations are ubiquitous. There is roughly 0.1 to 1 mutation per genome replication in viruses and 0.003 mutations per genome per replication in microbes. Mutation rates for higher organisms vary quite a bit between organisms, but excluding the parts of the genome in which most mutations are neutral (the junk DNA), the mutation rates are also roughly 0.003 per effective genome per cell replication. Since sexual reproduction involves many cell replications, humans have about 1.6 mutations per generation. This is likely an underestimate, because mutations with very small effect are easy to miss in the studies. Including neutral mutations, each human zygote has about 64 new mutations (Drake et al. 1998). Another estimate concludes 175 mutations per generation, including at least 3 deleterious mutations (Nachman and Crowell 2000).


Summary of the OP article: Mutation can't happen frequently enough to affect evolution because telomere repair and protein folding means environmental pressures and chemicals can't alter their shape enough to cause a mutation.

OP article leaves out: Telomere repair and protein folding isn't perfect and results in errors. Errors cause mutations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to TendiesForBreakfast (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 12, 2018, 06:38 AM

2. Yeah that is an oldie but goodie.

But of all mutations it is now established by empirical science that 99.94% of all mutations fall on the harmful side of the ledger. Granted most of those are nearly benign, but Harvard school of genetics has shown that even the almost total benign mutations wear down the genome.

Also, and most importantly, all verifiable and proved mutations that are nearly benign do little to actually change the species. Any chasnge is horizontal and not vertical which is the demand of the hypothesis of evolution.

Nearly all variations, adaptations and speciation are known to have been caused by the actions described by Mendel's Law. Either suppressed genes being expressed, or expressed genes being repressed, or diet causing a horizontal variant.

No new information has even been observed to be added to a genome. Nor has greater complexity has ever been observed by random mutation.

Yes that author left out telomere repair and protein folding (as well as many other things in just a short online paper).

Most times those mutated proteins are destroyed and remade, sometimes they make there escape! If it is in things like say hair color- it stays, if it is a major function- it debilitates the host!

Once again evolutionists have yet to show by science that quadrillions of quadrillions of "good mutations" in light of the pentillions X pentillions of "bad" mutations through random processes took us from a simple life form to todays biodiversity.

They have yet to validate anything beyond speciation! Why? Because they cannot!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to TendiesForBreakfast (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 12, 2018, 06:47 AM

3. Part 2

(Trying to keep single posts down)

Even talk origins condemn the hypothesis of evolution. They declare what is known about mutations--about 1.6 mutations /generation. Animal kingdom is barely higher(except on the simple life forms).

Now just think of the mutations required to go from an australopithecine to homo! There are millions upon millions required! Let us assume a liberal 3 /generation instead of the observed 1.6 mutations/ generation. Let us assume a quick 20 year time frame/generation.

A million generations (or 20 million years) would only produce 3 million mutations! NOw remember that 99.94% of all mutations are nearly benign (barely toxic) to toxic to the host that leaves 1800 "good" mutations left in 20 million years to take an ape and turn it to a man! This is provable science while Lucy the ape becoming Lucy the human is a so far untested, unproven hypothesis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to nolidad (Original post)

Wed Sep 12, 2018, 09:19 AM

4. "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind, and won't change the subject."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Micrometer (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 08:06 AM

5. Well as long as nearly all on your side of the aisle on this subject

Seem only capable of answering science with slurs, and consider remarks such as:

"They are loons", "you are wrong" as deep science, or posting comments from fringe people and calling them mainstream creationist thought instead of presenting what they call evidence I will post. They make themselves useful foils.

So as long as those who consider themselves so superior to me resort to ad-hominems, and other non answer answers, instead of engaging in debate;

I will continue to post that darwinian evolution takes more credulity to believe in than Divine Creation and then support that with hard science- with some sarcasm thrown in for humor effect!

I will commend you. YOu have at least sought to engage with science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to nolidad (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 13, 2018, 01:54 PM

6. Where in the fuck is this "science" you claim we are answering with slurs?


All you post is garbage from charlatans. I haven't seen one thing you have posted that constitutes anything to do with science other than laughable "papers" written by idiots trying to debunk it.

It is so intensely dumb and circular.

Fairy tale believers trying to use concepts they don't understand to prove those very concepts are wrong in order to conclude that the fairy tales are real.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink