Quote:
Originally posted by Yobor@Mar 24 2005, 04:01 PM
Your definition of mutation is skewed. A mutation is not a re-combining of DNA. It is what happens when part of the DNA is left out or changed during heredity. Sicle-cell Anemia is a good example. In Africa it was beneficial to have Sicle-cell Anemia because it stops Malaria. So the people with Sicle-Cell Anemia survived, while those without it died.
|
Mutations do not cause any form of evolution. Anybody that studies the subject will tell you that.
Mutations are scrambled DNA information that's already existing. That's all we observe. There is no new information generated with any mutations.
Scrambling up existing gene code will not give you something totally new. A turtle may be born with two heads, a cow may be born with 5 legs, or a person may be born with 11 fingers. But there's no
new information added. The part of the DNA code to generate fingers is obviously scrambled (mutated) and a duplicate was made of
existing information. If a person is born with 8 fingers, that is a loss of information. And that's how you get ahead? "Real evolution" would require an increase in genetic complexity with new information added to the DNA strand.
Please show me a beneficial mutation where new information is generated.
Your example of people with sickle-cell anemia are less likely to get malaria, is like saying if you cut off your legs you can't get athelete's foot.
Both sickle-cell anemia and malaria are negative and there's no new information added.
That process is going to turn a rock into a human in 4.6 billion years? Like I've stated before, I really admire your faith.
k: Monkeys are still having babies today, y'know. When that random beneficial mutation comes along to turn a monkey into a human let me know, I'm going to grab my camcorder.
"Time" is the evolutionists god.