On the follow up from WETL, lets look at some of the claims made about Mutations.
Claims from the creation camp on modern evolution;
1. Mutations only remove information rather than add information.
2. Mutations are always negative and would never make the recipient of said mutation more likely to procreate.
3. Mutations are too rare to have any real impact upon a species.
6. No single mutation could possibly give a species any discernible advantage.
One simple example, Milk. Those of us who are able to drink milk can thank a mutation for this. The cultures who raise herding animals developed the mutation that allows us to digest milk. Since the majority of people in the northern hemisphere have this ability this simple example shows us how a mutation can be beneficial.
Lets compare this mutation with the claims above.
1. Mutations only remove information rather than add information False. The information added is the ability to process Lactase.
2.Mutations are always negative and would never make the recipient of said mutation more likely to procreate. False.The mutation is positive giving the species the ability to consume a new food group, which can give the species food and water during times when there is low food sources, say winter time for example. 3.Mutations are too rare to have any real impact upon a species. False.The majority of humans have this mutation, the largest numbers are in the northern hemisphere. Yet it was only one mutation.
6.No single mutation could possibly give a species any discernible advantage. False. What is the advantage of a mutation like the ability to metabolize milk after our first few years? A renewable food source, calcium, protean as well as a food source that we are able to turn into a storable food. Say cheese just for one example.
When dealing with false claims it is important for us to take apart each and every claim and show how they can be false and misleading.
This Month we interview Don Exodus from YouTube, about David Klinghoffer and the article in the "Huff" Huffington Post, about , of course, Darwin and Hitler and how Hitler was a quire boy until he read Origin of Species. I contend that the Huff is a online rag and Marshal contends that it's not, don't tell him I think he probably is right I rarely ever read it. We go on to discuss another website and more tired old arguments against evolution. marshal boiled down the long list to just a few we discuss them on the show and I will take them apart one at a time in future posts.
1. Mutations only remove information rather than add information.
2. Mutations are always negative and would never make the recipient of
said mutation more likely to procreate.
3. Mutations are too rare to have any real impact upon a species.
4. Most organs and biological features are far to complex to be the
result of random mutations. (Irreducible complicity).
5. The Cambrian Explosion itself disproves the notion that life
evolves slowly. In the span of 20 million years we witnessed the
development of most complex life forms; where prior all life as simple
single celled life.
6. No single mutation could possibly give a species any discernible
advantage.
7. Punctuated equilibrium has been demonstrated to be impossible.
8. DNA or RNA could never randomly come into existence. Life could
never have formed without a designer. (note: not related to evolution a
common tactic)
9. The second law of thermo dynamics means that life is impossible.
(my note: Obviously not true because were it life would be impossible
on earth whether creationism or evolution were true).
10. The sun is not enough to overcome entropy. “Raw energy from the
sun, if not for the ability of living things to convert it to useful
energy such as sugars, proteins etc. would be a destroyer of life. In
many of the scenarios of primitive life the UV radiation is looked as
the driver of the mutations need for evolution, but it conversely
would destroy the organism as well if not protected. In fact the
mutation rate being very slow and the energy being very fast the
destruction would be very many times faster than the creation. Raw
energy from the sun, cannot create the specified complexity needed for
life. It can only cause complexity to be lost in mutations. In the
labs scientists use sophisticated equipment to polymerize proteins in
the right way. If sunlight were to enter this process it would
I am a follower and defender of Science, I consume Science in any format, books, documentaries, magazines, podcasts, live a Scientific life and with help from my wife we are raising our daughter in Science.
