Do Mutations UNLOCK The Secrets of Evolutionary Theory?

[@greenguitarfish]

Excellent ! The bottom line is, mutations damage and destroy existing information, and doing so just happens to be beneficial sometimes. But it results in a genetic loss, not new highly specific information added to cause an organism to be more complex, which is what evolution requires.

[@ErickoTandayu]

Thanks for summarizing this to make it easier

[@F15CEAGLE1]

Yes--thank you for the great clarification!

[@markklecka1823]

Thank you for all the hard work that the team does to bring the light of our Creator. Many blessings

[@ErickoTandayu]

Wow, so good. Easy to understand. Thank you

[@NewcreationinChrist-dg2gs]

Amen IGH 🙏🙏🙏✝️ what it really boils down to is, even when something appears to be beneficial it is losing something in the process. Not the kind of benefits Darwinian evolution would need to cause above species change. I think of another example. COVID - in time the virus got more contagious (gained information) while simultaneously becoming less deadly (lost information).

[@PhrontDoor]

Being less deadly isn't a LOSS of information. And being less than deadly to the carrier/host is almost always a huge advantage. Where did you get that decrease in virulence is a loss of information? Please see : "B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant of SARS-CoV-2: features, transmission and potential strategies" And we have seen speciation, as well.

[@statutesofthelord]

"got more contagious" No it didn't.

[@NewcreationinChrist-dg2gs]

@@statutesofthelord actually it did

[@NewcreationinChrist-dg2gs]

@@PhrontDoor "is almost a huge advantage" almost meaning it isn't. That's a nice story, though. Becoming less deadly makes it better for Darwinian evolution? That so? Explain.

[@PhrontDoor]

@@NewcreationinChrist-dg2gs Because if you KILL the host, you die too. Your ability to continue to exist AND to procreate and reproduce depend on NOT killing the host. This is covered in epidemiology and virology 101.

[@csmoviles]

Thank you so much for your excellent work❤❤❤

[@warrenwalker2665]

GOD understands HIS own creation and knows the intended overlapping of each creation to benefit another. Pretty sure GOD doesn't have "aha" moments...just sayin...

[@marcomclaurin6713]

By this logic all life must come from genetically superior creatures which I demonstrate in my video 'Begining of understanding ' Seraphim It's an observation that has been overlooked

[@statutesofthelord]

All life came from Jesus Christ. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

[@marcomclaurin6713]

@@statutesofthelord That doesn't dismiss my claim

[@nealcorbett1149]

@@marcomclaurin6713 "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:" Col 1:16 If your claim is that humans came from seraphim, It kinda does.

[@kilroy-cc8]

One interesting genetic "mutation" is the thickness of the red blood cells in some west African "tribes" that makes them immune to malaria!?

[@pureblood6310]

My question is if evolution is real why did it just stop?

[@Jeremy9697]

Your question shows you lack the understanding what evolution is....

[@earlgrant326]

Is it a mutation or nature experimenting with change because is anything permanent or temporary under the rule of nature.

[@critical-thought]

How does nature experiment? Does it have a goal or objective that it is trying to reach?

[@dougmoore4653]

how is drinking milk a mutation?

[@07_Tropic]

Because humans weren't originally able to drink milk

[@lechatbotte.]

He has an ability to use lactose aka milk sugars many people don’t yes it’s genetic

[@kamilczerwonka9652]

For example most white people can tolerate lactose and most asians can't its because we were drinking milk for generations while they were not( could have phraised it better)

[@oColt45o]

​@@lechatbotte. Its not a mutation. Its a different function of a pre-existing protein that's already contained within the DNA sequence. He is using the nomenclature of scientism which was designed to confuse the layman.

[@dooglitas]

It's not the drinking milk that is the mutation. It is the fact that after adulthood, one can still digest milk. Human babies digest milk, but the normal course of development is that after puberty, the ability to digest milk ceases--or at least that it what he is saying in the video.