On Natural Selection and Mutations
"Natural Selection" is NOT evolution, as much as "devolution" as it limits the gene pool and degrades and or ultimately limits the "selection". http://creationwiki.org/Devolution
U.S National Library of Medicine states, Gene mutations "prevent one or more of these proteins from working properly". When changing a gene’s instructions in order to make a protein, a mutation can cause that protein to malfunction and or to be missing entirely."
When a mutation alters a protein that plays a critical role in the body, it can disrupt normal development or cause a medical condition. A condition caused by mutations in one or more genes is called a genetic disorder." https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/mutationsanddisorders/mutationscausedisease
Mutations do not lead to upward and improved genetics. Instead they lead the way to damaged genes, in other words "devolution", and extinction, not "evolution".
'Genetic mutations cause flaws in the genetic code. They don’t add new information, they simply alter existing information . . . in almost all situations'. " Furthermore, "..most mutations result in corruption of information".(https://answersingenesis.org/charles-darwin/the-true-origin-of-the-species/)
Caricature courtesy of www.answeringenesis.com
"We have observed the change in dogs over time, but that doesn’t mean that evolution has occurred. You can breed wolves to get to chihuahuas, but you can’t breed chihuahuas to get wolves—variation in the genetic information has been lost. Darwin used this type of change as (false)evidence without an understanding of the limits of genetic change that are known today. (Italics ours) (Courtesy of Roger Patterson on March 8, 2007). https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/natural-selection-vs-evolution/
When speaking of "beneficial" mutations "There is nothing to support any information gain at all. But evolution posits that the information content of the simplest living organisms, the mycoplasma with 580,000 ‘letters’ (482 genes), was (miraculously) increased to...the 3 billion (genes) letters equivalent (and needed) in man. If this were so, we should be able to observe plenty of examples of information gain without intelligent input. But we have yet to observe even one.")(Italics ours) http://creation.com/is-antibiotic-resistance-really-due-to-increase-in-information
Dr. Gary Parker, a biology professor states:
"Each variety resulting from reproductive isolation has a smaller gene pool than the original and a restricted ability to explore new environments with new trait combinations or to meet changes in its own environment. The longterm result? Extinction would be much more likely than evolution". ( Professor Gary Parker is a biology teacher who received his PhD in biology with geology at Ball State University, USA.) http://www.theevolutioncrisis.org.uk/testimony5.php
Other true geneticists and scientist seriously question and downplay the truth about evolution
What other true geneticists are saying
Jerome LeJenune a French geneticist who discovered the abnormality in humans that causes Down syndrome said:
"We have no acceptable theory of evolution at the present time. There is none; and I cannot accept the theory that I teach to my students each year. Let me explain. I teach the synthetic theory known as the neo-Darwinian one, for one reason only; not because it’s good, we know it is bad, but because there isn’t any other. Whilst waiting to find something better you are taught something which is known to be inexact, which is a first approximation …"
–Professor Jerome Lejeune, in a lecture given in Parison March 17, 1985, translated by Peter Wilders
The "theory" of "evolution" as taught in our schools is a SCAM and is FALSE, it is BAD.
It is full of inconsistent "facts" that add up to NOTHING. It is elegant but empty. It is not cohesive. It is a badly designed hypothesis. It is a collections of wishes, and eisegesis based terminology, that uses beautiful true science to poorly, but elegantly manipulate man's twisted and crafty ideas in order to ultimately teach false science. It comes from Atheists, and Theists, not from true science.
(Eisegesis is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that the process introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text"). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis
This is the true agenda of theists, secularists and "evolutionists".
Regardless of how well funded by the National Science Foundation and other government sites may be, their findings appear elegant and "almost" true, but in reality are full of empty substance, whose research and findings ultimately and actually point to the Creator, The God of the Bible as being the origin of Life.
A well respected evolutionist and paleontologist once shamed the evolutionist world in a lecture to his colleagues in New York City.
"While he was yet the internationally respected senior paleontologist at the British Museum, Colin Patterson4 stunned the scientific world by calling evolution an “anti-theory” that generates “anti-knowledge”—a concept full of explanatory vocabulary that actually explains nothing and that even generates a false impression of what the facts are". http://members.iinet.net.au/%7Esejones/pattam01.htmlhttps://answersingenesis.org/biology/homology-comparative-similarities/
God's fingerprints are all over the Universe. Gen 1:1 (see also http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.4161/cc.8.18.9536)
What about the fossil record ?
The view that the earth (and its “fossil record”) is hundreds of millions of years old is highly questioned by reputable scientists, and the idea that we were formed in those hundreds of millions of years is FALSE. Geologic systems are far from certain and riddled with contradictions.
(See also Radiometric Dating: Back to Basics.)
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/radiometric-dating-back-to-basics/
"No real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationalist, uses the fossil record in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation" (Ridley, M New Scientist 90:832 1981)
Evolutionary ideas need a major rethink
A Nature News article in 2004 asked a profound question, “Does evolutionary theory need a major rethink?”One group of scholars said, “Yes, urgently.” The other group reassured readers not to worry, asserting, “No–all is well.”
This means that Darwin’s unique
ideas, which serve as the core of evolutionary theory, are coming in
for brutal questioning.
“Perhaps haunted
by the spectre of intelligent design, evolutionary biologists wish to
show a united front to those hostile to (evolutionary) science.”(Italics ours)[1]
https://crev.info/2017/05/darwin-design-art-shocked/References
Copyright Computer Integrations, Inc. ©, 2017
No part of this article may be reproduced or copied without
the author’s exclusive permission
