Evolving out of adaptive mutation

Posted on

Thinking again…

Since 99.9% of mutations are harmful to organisms, it would seem that if Darwinism is true, evolution would point species away from the adaptive mutation process, the very mechanism that Darwin claimed made evolution possible.

First, genuine mutations are very rare in nature. Secondly, most mutations are harmful since they are random, rather than orderly changes in the structure of genes; any random change in a highly ordered system will be for the worse, not for the better. For example, if an earthquake were to shake a highly ordered structure such as a building, there would not be a random change in the framework of the building which, in all probability, would not be an improvement~B. G. Ranganathan, Origins?, Pennsylvania: The Banner Of Truth Trust, 1988

Or perhaps if Darwinism is true, than evolution should decrease the possibility that a mutation is crippling or fatal.  Perhaps organisms should constantly be mutating for the better, so fast that we can see it happening. Since Darwinism’s supposedly had millions of years to adapt itself, why not?

Maybe it’s just not true.


4 thoughts on “Evolving out of adaptive mutation

    Jaimie Gould said:
    May 28, 2010 at 10:23 pm

    That has always been my problem. An adaptive mutation would only hit one member of a species at a time. Which one is the first to become a new species? If so and that member were a new species then it could not reproduce anymore. How could mass amounts become a new species at the same time? Wouldn’t inbreeding doom a new species if there were only a few? No answers ever to my questions on that magical moment when one species becomes another.

    Amos Volante said:
    May 29, 2010 at 2:37 am

    Even if my hair stopped falling out, as part of a random mutation: What good would that do for the rest of humanity?

    I’d like it though…But would three billion women come running to help me advance the species?

    James said:
    January 9, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    The majority of mutations aren’t beneficial, hence cancers etc. but when an beneficial mutation does arise, it is natural selection which allows this mutation to spread through a population.

    The mutation must be beneficial to survival, if this is true then the organism is more likely to survive, reproduce and pass on the beneficial mutated gene.

    New species arise when a population is split typically by physical processes such as the formation of a mountain range, lake, etc. Adaptive mutations occur independently within the two groups until eventually there have been enough changes which would prevent successful mating were the two groups reunited. When this point is reached, the two groups have become distinct species.

    This is why we don’t see evolution or the development of new species in humans, because there are no survival pressures anymore (i.e. healthcare) and populations are no longer ‘splittable’ what with the ease we are now able to travel the globe.

    magus71 responded:
    February 18, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    Since mutations are almost always harmful (Actually, have a helpful mutation ever been observed), mutations themselves should occur in ever declining numbers over time. So the very process of adaptive mutation should be in decline. If it really happens at all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s