Great thread for those who have the capability to reason and reflect...

by Babu G. Ranganathan

What are mutations really? In biology, true mutations are really accidents in the genetic code. The mutations are caused by environmental forces such as radiation. The energy from the radiation will causes random changes within the very structure of genes. Evolutionists believe that if given enough time these accidental changes within the structure of genes will change the biology of an animal or plant from simpler to more complex or from type of life into another. The reality, however, is otherwise.




Because mutations are accidents they are almost always harmful. Even if a good mutation occurred for every good one there will be thousands of harmful (or bad) ones with the net effect over time being disastrous for the species.

Imagine ramming your car into a tree hoping that if you do it enough times the accidental changes to the car will eventually turn the car into an airplane.

Or imagine that by randomly changing the sequence of letters in a romance novel will turn it into a book on astronomy.



Most biological changes in a species are not from mutations but, rather, from new combinations of already existing genes. People often ask how all the varieties of humans (the various "races") could have come from Adam and Eve. It's simple and it didn't have to involve mutations.

Very interesting article with interesting points which need to be taken in to consideration when examining the subject of life..

Because mutations are accidents they are almost always harmful. Even if a good mutation occurred for every good one there will be thousands of harmful (or bad) ones with the net effect over time being disastrous for the species.

So the species with the bad mutation dies, and the species with the useful mutations passes on their genes. Certain species did have disastrous endings, and some were successful. Once successful they can thrive.

Imagine ramming your car into a tree hoping that if you do it enough times the accidental changes to the car will eventually turn the car into an airplane.

What does that have to do with Biology?

Or imagine that by randomly changing the sequence of letters in a romance novel will turn it into a book on astronomy.

Imagine bible codes producing supposed "miraculous predictions" out of randomness.

Most biological changes in a species are not from mutations but, rather, from new combinations of already existing genes.

Why not both???

People often ask how all the varieties of humans (the various "races") could have come from Adam and Eve. It's simple and it didn't have to involve mutations.

From what reference frame can an adam and eve scenario be explained?

Could you add the source for this??

[edit on 21-2-2010 by john124]

I believe that life as we see today is a combination of environmental effects(mutations) and breeding.
Your analogy of ramming a car into a tree is not a fair metaphor for evolution, as bashing your car repeatedly does nothing to alter the schematics or principles at work within the car.

Rather think of evolution as the continuing process of redesigning the vehicle. With each new incarnation the vehicle (at least in theory) will improve. Sure some designs and ideas get tossed out as time goes on, but this is as they say, evolution...

Mutations in DNA are EXACTLY like crashing your car into a tree repeatedly. Exactly.

Oh wait, no they're not! The "romance novel" metaphor is closer, but still incredibly far off. For one thing, there are only four elements in DNA, whereas there are more than 26 elements in a novel (you've got letters, punctuation, and possibly certain patterns of letters like "ch" which always indicate the same thing). So variations are going to be less severe.

Mutations can provide beneficial effects over time; those that don't provide benefits will, if they provide harms, kill off their bearers. Those that don't go either way will die with the same incidence as unmutated members of the species. Beneficial mutations will survive with higher incidents.

It's really pretty simple to get a cursory understanding of, and I cannot comprehend why people refuse to get at that. A comprehensive understanding is way beyond me, at least, but the cursory understanding is so simple.

well, evolution is the passing on of mutations that are helpful, and yes that is possible. also, cars cannot change because of the fact that they are machines, and not organic. organisms have the capability to change their genetic framework with the help of mutations that allow the benefit of their species in their environment.

the Galapogos Islands, Darwin's inspiration, are prime example. there are many species, such as the marine iguana, blue footed booby, etc., which are not found anywhere else. these species had to adapt to there environment to survive. like the many species of birds, all from on ancestral line, that have different diets, beak shape, etc. those with larger, stronger beaks feed on nuts, while those with more slender beaks feed on nectar, or insects that live beneath bark.

many types of animals have traits unique to their species, adaptations that had benefits for their species. the giraffe's neck, penguins being such able swimmers, etc. humans, natures wimps, had to learn to create tools and clothing to defend their hairless, defenseless behinds.

and, fundies, how could noah have taken trillions of types of animals upon his ark? some of them had to have changed along the way!

evolution is true, god is fake.

Originally posted by oozyism

Because mutations are accidents they are almost always harmful. Even if a good mutation occurred for every good one there will be thousands of harmful (or bad) ones with the net effect over time being disastrous for the species.

This is just a big straw man ... mutations=bad=no evolution ...

The net effect is only disastrous for species that have mutations that are harmful.

Those that do have beneficial mutations, the one good one in thousands of bad ones, have the net effect, over time, of being beneficial for a species.

The car and romance novel analogy are ridiculous as they are crude.

People often ask how all the varieties of humans (the various "races") could have come from Adam and Eve. It's simple and it didn't have to involve mutations.

Please explain ...

Originally posted by oozyism
Even over time it won't make much of a difference because the bad mutation will always be overwhelming and will ultimately cause the extinction of the mutated creature.

Do you get it or do we need to discuss more?

But those organisms with debilitating mutations would not be ideal mates or would die off before they could reproduce and their genetic mutation would die with the individual and not be continued with the species

That's at least how I understand it, I'm far from an evolutionary biologist though.

[edit on 21-2-2010 by DirtyPete]

Frome the source:

Just as some individuals today carry genes to produce descendants with different color hair and eyes, humanity's first parents, Adam and Eve, possessed genes to produce all the variety and races of men. You and I today may not carry the genes to produce every variety or race of humans, but humanity's first parents did possess such genes.

This statement is a total fabrication.

There is NO way, that ANYBODY knows the genetic make up of Adam and Eve, to say that they possesed all variations possible.

It's simply ridiculous to even think that any sort of scientific data could point the that. This article is clearly biased in a relgious sense.

~Keeper

So with this theory....pretty much we are all just a bunch of misfits...cause we are all full of mutations.

I think its easy to assume that mutations are bad...but how do we know they arent just natural changes that have always occurred through nature? How do we know that evolution itself isnt from mutations?

I dont think there is enough evidence at all to say all mutations are a bad thing.