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.