A code needs a coder.

[-57]

You seem to think that nothing happens in evolution until a point mutation occurs. Evolution depends on random variation. That is, in each generation a trait varies from individual to individual. Some have more, some have less but most are about average. In fact, the distribution of variation of a trait in the population will approach a random (that is, a "bell-curve") distribution. That is why the theory is called "evolution by random variation and selection." What it means is that if the environment is stable, most of the population will survive, but the outliers won't fare so well. On the other hand, if the environment changes, there will be already in the population outliers to take advantage of it. Mutations contribute to the production of random variation, but are not the sole or direct cause of it.

I'm not arguing heritable traits.
I'm arguing that random mutation...where a beneficial mutation is extremely rare...has the ability to occur again and again, many, many times in a species progeny....increasing the information in the DNA code substantially....is impossible.

 

[Speedwell]

I'm not arguing heritable traits.
I'm arguing that random mutation...where a beneficial mutation is extremely rare...has the ability to occur again and again, many, many times in a species progeny....increasing the information in the DNA code substantially....is impossible.

Again, that is just nonsense which has nothing to do with what the theory of evolution actually says.

 

[-57]

Again, that is just nonsense which has nothing to do with what the theory of evolution actually says.

Are you now claiming just 1 mutation is required to form the dolphins echo-location system?

 

[Speedwell]

I'm not arguing heritable traits.

Random variation of heritable traits is what drives evolution. If you're not arguing about that you're not arguing about the theory of evolution at all.

 

[-57]

Random variation of heritable traits is what drives evolution. If you're not arguing about that you're not arguing about the theory of evolution at all.

You keep presenting micro-evolution or horizontal evolution as proof of your poor theory of evolutionism rather than Macro-evolutionism or vertical evolutionism.

...and I know why. You have nothing that allows for extremely rare beneficial mutations to accumulate and form fully functional traits.

 

[Speedwell]

You keep presenting micro-evolution or horizontal evolution as proof of your poor theory of evolutionism rather than Macro-evolutionism or vertical evolutionism.

...and I know why. You have nothing that allows for extremely rare beneficial mutations to accumulate and form fully functional traits.

And you keep babbling on about some preposterous straw-man version of evolution which you have invented.

 

[loveofourlord]

Will you please stop with the coloring book version. Stop with the assumption that so-called beneficial mutations can repeat in an animals DNA to the point that they accumulate and form new organs, appendages, systems and so on.

please stop with the silly responses that ammount to, LALLALALALALLALA!!!, do you honestly think anyone buys it? All your doing is turning people away from ceationis....actually keep it up :> your helping me alot.

All you have is, "But but but but assumption." show how we are wrong, show how it's impossible, show how what we say happened couldn't possibly. They are assumptions based upon all the facts, and creationism has less then that, you have no basis for saying it's impossible, thats a assumption against the facts. Sorry all the facts point towards evolution. Please show your work, show your evidence, show something that proves creationism, because uhuh, isn't a valid scientific argument.

 

[loveofourlord]

I asked you to show how multiple extremely rare and random "beneficial mutation" could occur over and over again, many, many times in the vast amount of DNA effecting the small amount of DNA responsible for evolving a trait.
Your own ratio's of beneficial to harmful mutations would strongly suggest a harmful mutation would occur long before a beneficial mutation would occur and shut down the process.

....what part of majority of harmful mutations die out long before they even reach birth or die afterwards? And again, most mutations are neutral that make it to adulthood, or mutations that cause variation. Sheesh you been told this dozens of times now, doesn't make you look good, if your response every time is to pretend like you weren't just explained it, or to go, "Assumption." and again what do you call beneficial? if 95% of the changes between monkeys and humans are nothing more then variation changes, then 95% of them arn't beneficial nescarily. Or they can majourly be beneficial.

Is small changse to the variation that say make monkeys more upright and able to walk better are they all beneficial. you seem to keep talking about beneficial and I don't think you know what that word even means. If your term for beneficial is feathers becoming red to hide in a plant that is red, thats going to be rare. If you mean the patch of red that appears becoming bigger and more prominate on a bird that lives in a green tree, so that it can live in a red tree well thats variation and can happen alot. In fact every generation will have some variation where some birds will have more red, some will have less, wether it's beneficial will depend on if the birds are in green trees or red trees.

Again depending on what you call criteria of a beneficial mutation those 300 some odd beneficial changes creationists like to tote are required to make a monkey into a human go away as majority of changes between human and monkey fall into the variation catagory and we know these occur.