redfern said:
The vast majority of mutations are in non-coding areas of the DNA, and have almost no effect on the fitness of the individual.*So your 100 mutations turns into probably less than 10 that really count
There are two mistakes with your statements.
1. In the past evolutionists thought non-coding DNA was mostly useless biological leftovers. So, mutations in the non-coding area were thought to have "almost no effect. *Science has been showing that the non coding DNA is largely functional serving regulatory purposes. So its wrong to dismiss 90% of mutations as "almost no effect". We still are learning just how much of the non coding DNA is serving a purpose...70%? 100%?
2. Even if we only look at your number of 10 mutations added to our genome each generation, that is devasting long term, to our population that produces less than 3 children for every two adults. IOW selection can't remove them.... they accumulate generation to generation.*
Back in 1950 geneticist Muller started speculating about the problem of genetic load. His concern, based on the science of that time thought that the deleterious mutation rate could be as high as .3 per person per generation. P-149,150 Human Genetics. (Crow repeated similar concern in 1997)
BTW....the 100 additional mutation rate per generation is likely very low. In 2000 Crowell and Nachman estimated the number at 175 just within our reproductive cells.*
redfern said:
If any of those 10 are seriously deleterious, selection will keep you from spreading that through the population.
Correct. The key word in your sentence is "serious". However, harmful mutations are still accumulating generation to generation in our genome.
So.... there is no such thing as individuals being "unusually free of deleterious changes".
redfern said:
I can’t help it if you are ignorant of statistics.
*
One of us might be ignorant. If you don't think you have many deleterious mutations, you are wrong. Kondrashov says that "The total number of new mutations per diploid human genome per generation is about 100...at least 10% of these are deleterious".*
Kondrashov is an evolutionist. He admits the problem and then tries to explain it away. But in any case...there is no such thing as individuals being "unusually free of deleterious changes". And, in any case...I am glad to help you out with statistics.
redfern said:
By contrast, the (admittedly rare) beneficial mutation will spread more rapidly (that is why it is called a beneficial mutation – it is one that aids in reproductive success).
That is what you must believe for evolutionism to work. That is what R.Dawkins and many others teach. But... it is more like wishful thinking than it is science.
Your "rare beneficial mutation" is likely not as beneficial as Talkorigins would have you believe.* Generally, if not always these mutations might have a beneficial outcome, but at the expense of damage to preexisting information. For example, most if not all resistant bacterium have digressed genetically and are unable to survive without antibiotics. They no longer have the genome to survive multiple environments like the parent population.*What evolutionism needs though, is not mutations that have a beneficial outcome but a mechanism that creates *
redfern said:
In the real world of science, these things have been studied for years.
Exactly!!!*... For about 100 years now.
redfern said:
But those studies are not at the level of he silly misleading “100 mutations per generation” sound bytes that you guys have to rely on. They actually involve some pretty serious mathematics and research. For example, here is one from over 20 years ago
I agree. we shouldn't rely on sound bytes. I agree that 100 mutations per generation is a low estimate. But, even that low number causes problems to evolutionary beliefs. That is why many articles from evolutionists such as Kondrashov, Crowell, Kimura, Crow,* Walker and Keightley and more admit the problem then try understand the data within their worldview.
Our phenome is evidence of a 'Super Intelligence'...even Natural selection appears to be a designed mechanism to help preserve life in our fallen world. The evidence suggests man has been on our planet a relatively short time, just as the Bible says.** The evidence shows, death is a certainty..... and through Jesus Christ who defeated death, we can look forward to the day when "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."
