Here are important scientific facts which disprove the notion that mutations can produce new species. The truth is that all mutations are harmful. They never accomplish anything worthwhile. Evolutionary theory is a myth. God created everything; the evidence clearly points to it. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.
CONTENTS: MUTATIONS: 1
Introducing Neo-Darwinists: The evolutionists who pin all their hopes on mutations
Four Important Facts about Mutations: Four qualities which destroy their usefulness
Flaws in the Mutation Theory: 23 facts which make the situation even worse
Page numbers without book references refer to the
book, MUTATIONS, from which these facts are summarized. An
asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a
creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the set of books this
Encyclopedia is based on
, only 164 statements are by creationists.
Evolution requires that new kinds of plants and animals be able to be made. But changes within species are normal and do not show or prove evolution.
Evolution of life forms requires that changes be made which cross over from one species—and produce a different one.
According to evolutionists, natural selection and mutations are the only two ways that new species have ever been made.
In the previous major article in this series (Natural Selection), a surprising amount of scientific information was given, which clearly disproves the idea that natural selection could produce even one new true species.
In this article, you will learn that mutations cannot do it either.
Evolutionists who believe that natural selection accomplished the task are called Darwinists. Evolutionists who believe that only mutations can make the evolutionary changes are called Neo-Darwinists.
Many evolutionists have recognized that natural selection could not possibly produce trans-species changes, so they declare that mutations must have produced the multitude of separate species found in our world today.
But there are clear-cut facts which reveal that it would be totally impossible for mutations to produce even one new species.—pp. 11-12.
Here are these facts:
1: Rare effects. Mutations are very rare. They hardly ever occur in the natural world. Their very rarity dooms the possibility that they could produce the prolific number of plant and animal species found in our world.
Mutations are simply too rare to have produced all the necessary traits of even one life form, much less millions. For each plant and animal has millions upon millions of specific characteristics.—p. 12.
2: Random effects. Mutations are always random—always! They are never purposive or directed. Yet the millions of characteristics in a living creature are very special: Each one is needed and serves an important function.
A mutation is a random, wild, event. It is something like an automobile crash: It comes suddenly, when least expected, and no one can predict the outcome. But one thing you can be sure of: It will produce damage.—p. 12.
3: Not helpful. Evolution requires improvement, but mutations never help anyone. They only weaken or injure.—p. 13.
4: Very harmful effects. Nearly all mutations are harmful. In most instances, they weaken or damage the organism so seriously that it will not long survive. If it does survive, its offspring tend to eventually die out.—p. 13.
Mutations are rare, random, almost never an improvement, always weakening or harmful, and often fatal to the organism or its offspring.
Why mutations? Why then do the evolutionists cling to mutations as the means of producing species crossovers?
They stay with mutations because, apart from the foolish theory of natural selection, they have nothing else!—pp. 13-14.
At this point, someone might ask how we can be sure that mutations are always random and negative. This is known for a certainty because research scientists have spent decades carrying on research experiments with X rays, radiation, and chemicals, in the hopes of producing new species—and thus proving that evolutionary theory is true. But they have totally failed. More on this later.
1: Not once. Not once has there ever been a recorded instance of a truly beneficial mutation!
There are instances of reshuffled genes, which produced better varieties of grapes, apples, and roses. But those were normal changes within species. (They were still grapes, apples, and roses.) None of these are mutations. A true mutation is a damage factor which produces injury or death.
As a result of millions of fruit-fly experiments, under intense radiation, not one useful mutation has ever been found.—p. 14.
2: Only harm. Those organisms, which mutate and do not outright kill, are generally so weakened that they or their offspring tend to die out. Given enough mutations, not evolution into something better—but death—would come to everyone on earth.—p. 14.
3: Usually eliminate. Organisms which have mutations are so badly weakened, that they tend to die out or are weeded out by the problems of life.—p. 14.
4: Mutagens. For decades, scientists have been warning us about the dangers of radiation. What is that danger? It is X rays, radiation, and certain chemicals which can cause mutations in our body. How can such a terrible curse benefit us or produce new species?—pp. 14-15.
5: Dangerous accidents. It is only the rareness of mutations in the natural world (apart from X rays and atomic bombs) which protect the race from being destroyed by mutations.—p. 15.
6: Intertwined catastrophe. Each gene affects many characteristics,
and each characteristic is affected by many genes. This complicated interweaving
of the DNA codes means that each mutation can result in damage to many things.
There is no way that a bunch of mutations could help anyone.—p. 15.
7: Only random. People can never predict in advance when or where a mutation will occur or what type of damage will result. It is a totally random event.—p. 15.
8: Small changes cannot do it. Evolutionists say that, given enough time, a few mutations, here and there, can produce new species. Each one changes one species a little more toward another. But that is not true, for we find no halfway species anywhere! All are distinct and different.—pp. 16-18.
9: Mathematically impossible. Not enough mutations could naturally occur to accomplish any trans-species changes. Mutations usually occur only once in every ten million duplications of a DNA molecule.
Assuming that all mutations were beneficial (which none are), the odds of even several mutations naturally occurring within one organism would be very unlikely. Four mutations, for example, would only occur once in a billion, billion times.—p. 17.
10: Time no solution. Evolution requires millions of beneficial mutations, all working closely together to produce delicate living systems full of fine-tuned structures, organs, hormones, and all the rest. This could not be done in a little amount of time or immense amounts of time. How long would a new type of animal last while waiting for millions of years of mutations to put it together?—p. 17.
11: Gene Stability. There is a reason we can know that mutations have been as infrequent in the past as they are now: the factor of gene stability. If mutations had been abundant earlier, then, during past centuries, our bodies would have been destroyed by them.—p. 17.
12: Syntropy. *Szent-Gyorgyi, a two-time Nobel Prize winner, pointed out that it would be impossible for any organism to survive even for a moment, unless it were already complete with all its functions and they were all working perfectly or nearly so. Everything in a species has to work right, or it becomes weak and eventually dies out. Mutations do not strengthen; they only weaken. They do not produce new, stronger species; they only injure the ones which already exist.—p. 18.
13: Minor changes damage offspring the most. Most mutations are small, but it is those little changes which would hurt offspring the most. That is because major mutations kill too quickly for there to be offspring.—p. 18.
14: Single generation required. Hundreds and even thousands of positive mutations, working harmoniously together would be needed—and it would all have to occur very fast. It would be impossible for mutations, strung out over centuries or ages to produce the needed changes from one species to another.—p. 18.
15: Not big enough. Most mutations are so minor that, although they are damaging or deadly, they could not possibly change one species to another. They just do not make a large enough change.—pp. 18-19.
16: Reproductive changes too infrequent. Mutational changes in the reproductive organs occur far less often than elsewhere. Yet it is reproductive changes which would especially be needed for new species to be formed.—pp. 19-20.
17: Evolution requires increasing complexity. Evolution, by its very nature, must continually move upward. Yet mutations only tear down and disintegrate.—p. 20.
18: Evolution would require new information. Vast, new information banks in the DNA would be required, for a new species to be produced. Mutations could never accomplish that, any more than swinging a bat in a china closet would improve the glassware stored there.—pp. 20-21.
19: Evolution requires new organs and different structures. But mutations would not provide the new physical equipment and capabilities.—p. 21.
20: Not enough visible mutations. For every visible mutation (which changes a body part in a way to be seen), there are 20 invisible ones which generally kill the organism.—p. 21.
21: Never higher vitality than the parent. Geneticists tell us that each mutation weakens the organism. Never is its offspring stronger than the damaged parent. Soon the family line ends.—p. 21.
22: No evidence of species change. Mutations are not producing new species, yet we should see it occurring. In a later major article in this series (Fossils and Strata), we will learn that there is no evidence of new species production in the past. (We can know this, because we should be able to find the halfway species in between, yet they have never existed.)—p. 21.
23: Gene uniqueness forbids species change. Because there are millions of factors in every DNA code, it forbids the possibility of wholesale change by mutations.—pp. 21.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
To the NEXT PAGE to conclude what you are now reading (Mutations: Part 2 of 2)