Mutations: A HUGE Problem for Evolution

[@sinclairj7492]

I’m still waiting for my mutant powers and I’m way past puberty.

[@TickedOffPriest]

I want shape-shifting.

[@2l84me8]

Life isn’t a comic book. Pay attention in school.

[@FECtetra1918]

@@sinclairj7492 Go back to school.

[@rodcarty2]

Mutations which break things but are called beneficial are like something breaking on the engine in your car. The engine no longer runs, so the clear benefit is you save money because you don't have to keep paying for gasoline. However, the overall effect is degenerative, in that, obviously, your car can no longer carry you anywhere.

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

That's a great analogy actually, thanks for sharing!

[@SteveLomas-k6k]

Or if the exhaust rusts through, the car will get better mileage, evolution in action! :)

[@horace9341]

@@SteveLomas-k6k Whilst filling the occupants lungs with deadly carbon dioxide. It’s like saying cutting off your legs will save on food consumption because you don’t use up carbs. Humans are devolving rather than evolving and the only reason we live longer than say 200 years ago is because of better health, nutrition, and welfare.

[@rizdekd3912]

"Mutations which break things but are called beneficial are like something breaking on the engine in your car." No they're not. Mutations change the genetic material. Breaking something in your car would be like breaking something on your body. It's hard to think of damage that could help, but it's possible. Regardless, that's not what genetic mutations are. When mutations occur, the genetic material still keeps working. There isn't a direct correlation from one gene to one trait. Traits are dependent on many different genes working together and those genes also influence other things as well, so it's not a one to one correlation. Most mutations are thought to be neutral or at least don't change the outcome significantly. So an accumulation of neutral genetic changes that haven't caused the organism to die may accumulate to traits that aid in survival of either the individual or of the gene pool. "However, the overall effect is degenerative," I don't think that has been shown...ie that ALL mutations are degenerative. And...if all mutations are not degenerative, it could be that God created genetic material such that it would sometimes produce beneficial mutations and that may be how God created new life forms. DNA seems ideally suited to this kind of evolution. If God didn't want mutations, then he could have overseen production of new generations personally using his divine will/power so no deleterious mutations would ever occur.

[@SteveLomas-k6k]

​@@rizdekd3912 "It's hard to think of damage that could help" There are lots of examples: Bears that LOSE the ability to make pigment in their fur, have a benefit in the Arctic. Bacteria that LOSE the ability to digest certain chemicals gain resistance. People that LOSE the mechanism that creates lactose intolerance after a certain age- can drink milk in adulthood. The same thing in my 50 year old summer driver- the nagging alarms don't work- that's a huge improvement, the cat converter is rusted out = improved performance. All are caused by the same thing; entropy. The problem is you can't extrapolate this destruction into a creative mechanism for the same things that are being destroyed! Genetic mutations (that do anything at all) overwhelmingly reflect loss of function, trait/DNA decay, regressive evolution. It's difficult to find any clear exceptions to this rule is it not?

[@baraskparas9559]

Point mutations caused by chemical or physical agents is only one of 43 different biochemical influences on gene expression but Darwin could not have known that in the mid 1800's .

[@kristyclonts2799]

Darwin knew nothing of genetics period .

[@gilachess]

Isn't it true some mutations can be beneficial and is part of evolution. The ones that gets the bad mutation dies off and the lucky ones who have the beneficial mutation survives.

[@globalcoupledances]

Good summary of evolution

[@vladim73]

Yes! But that's only natural selection, not evolution.

[@globalcoupledances]

@vladim73 - natural selection leads to evolution. Have you asked yourself why humans are bipedal?

[@vladim73]

​@@globalcoupledancesNo! Natural selection leads to the survival of the fittest! And yes, I've just read an extensive scientific paper about how implausible is for bipedalism to have happened by luck/chance. Have you watched this entire video as it answers your questions and doubts way better than me?

[@globalcoupledances]

@vladim73 - "implausible is for bipedalism to have happened by luck/chance" It happened by luck/chance, the knuckle walking humans went extinct

[@horsejumpridego]

This is a great show!

[@s.unosson]

Well explained.

[@andrewshear2927]

No that is not exactly true. Some mutations are harmful some are beneficial. For example people who have sickle cell are better able to survive in areas with Malaria. Another example are the Tibetan people who have a mutation in the EPAS1 gene that allows them to use less oxygen and still deliver it to their limbs while exercising at high altitude. These are examples of beneficial mutations.

[@PsalmCourier]

Actually they said that with another example about intolerance to antibiotics. What they also said is what both the benefit and the harm have in common is that both remove genetic info. It emphasizes the problem with the theory to begin with, does not help its credibility. Same thing that Natural selection does. Takes a wide variety and makes it slimmer than before. And this is observed. Dormant genese within specimens that are already there, just being expressed or not, isnt a mutational "spawn" of new info. We also keep that in mind.

[@23Raind]

CMI doesn't argue no mutations have benefits. Even beneficial mutations (beneficial by circumstance) can contribute to harming the integrity of the genome. Beyond that; the minor deleterious mutations outnumber positive mutations by orders of magnitude and almost all of those bad mutations cannot be selected.

[@andrewshear2927]

No it's really 50/50. It all depends on the organisms environment.

[@MatthewPeeters-l7i]

Please see: Sickle-cell anemia does not prove evolution! - creation.com/sickle

[@jensswales]

adaptation, not mutation

[@magadeplorable4889]

Evolution…Naturalistic philosophy masquerading as science. A fairy tale for adults. As believable as the Tooth Fairy 🤣.

[@spamm0145]

FACT

[@michaelkeffer504]

@@magadeplorable4889 Go you!

[@Mark-h2s]

Much of modern medicine is based directly upon evolutionary theory. You people really don't understand how important evolutionary biology is, do you?

[@BlackHat-v4j]

@@spamm0145false evolution is how we got dogs

[@DX47-h3z]

As a chemistry major, this is quite interesting.

[@boni2786]

Great!

[@patrickedgington5827]

I know we can count the number +/- of mutations per generation. I know as well we can track changes in languages over time. What I can’t find is any information that points back? If we can count the mutation, can we look back and count the generations? Can we look at language and figure out when they were all together in one place?

[@pigzcanfly444]

@patrickedgington5827 there is a book called "Traced" by Nathaniel Jeansen that covers this subject.

[@patrickedgington5827]

​@@pigzcanfly444 thank you that’s helpful

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

Learn population genetics. The advent of this field was what secured evolutionary theory as the cornerstone of modern Biology.

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

​@pigzcanfly444 That book is filled of lies and scientific inconsistencies.

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

​@@patrickedgington5827 Start with Futuyma's textbook on evolutionary biology.

[@doctortabby]

A fruitfully without wings is a fruit walk.

[@ben-str]

Great mutation.

[@davidhirt9129]

How does it come this is not taught in school?

[@woobykal68]

Because no-one will believe it.

[@eladio_cro_warface]

@@georg7120 you plan to troll all day? 🤣

[@eladio_cro_warface]

​​@@georg7120no, but telling he is wrong without good arguments, can be. Involving creation is another falacy. If you can prove evolution, please do. You will be richest man on earth. Till then listen others without arguing with outliers skiping all main problems with evolution which are huge, like you can hear in this video - but you just dont listen.

[@spamm0145]

@@georg7120 2+2=4, lets corrupt that information, 2+2=5, now we have new information but the original meaning of the information is lost, molecular machines will now have corrupted information to work from, this will not improve an organism, it will take it closer to extinction, exactly what we see now. Yeah, your idiocy makes lots of sense.

[@JimWilliams-s8z]

They leave out known cellular function also which shows a fraction of 1% of passed on mutations are advantageous. This kills evolutionary theory outright.

[@JimWilliams-s8z]

Most mutations are not passed on to offspring! OF THE ONES THAT ARE LESS THAN 1% ARE ADVANTAGEOUS. these are the hard stats.

[@klouis1886]

​@georg7120 If you don't look exactly like your parents you have mutations

[@theHentySkeptic]

It is nowhere 1% advantageous, it is waaaaay less than that.

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

@@klouis1886 That's not caused by mutation :)

[@spamm0145]

@@georg7120 1% of base pair differences between a chimp and a human is over 30 million, you're living in dreamland if you think an occasional beneficial mutation gets you from chimp to human in millions of years, I'll give you trillions of years, it isn't happening, this is why evolution is losing traction, its a stupid mechanism worshiped by fools.

[@JimWilliams-s8z]

@georg7120 negative! This is why tjere is no quantified computer algorithm which supports evolution . It's an impossible task with known cellular function.

[@tim2muntu954]

What percntage of your typos improved the content of your communicatioons?

[@Jonsbasecamp]

Thank you!

[@svenskbibel]

Thanks! 👏

[@anderssvensk4317]

Extremely important information! Thanks for sharing and your perseverance too share the truth. 👏👍👊

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

God's word is true. Darwin's word is fable.

[@John75Mulhern]

Ever think about doing stand up comedy? 🤣

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@John75Mulhern I haven't, but if I ever did there is plenty of laughable material in Chuckles Darwin's hypothetical pipe dream 😂

[@ByTheGraceofGOD777-u7o]

“I was a young man with ‘Uninformed’ Ideas. People made a ‘RELIGION’ out of them,,,” ~ Charles Darwin ~~~ :o ~~~ “Oh, If I could only ‘Undo’ what I have done.” ~ Charles Darwin (3 Weeks Before his Death) ~~~ :o ~~~ Darwin, himself REPENTED !!! ~~~ :) ~~~ Have 'YOU' ??? ~~~ :)

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

​@@joefriday2275 A sense of humour evolved due to social cohesion and the need to share close, affectionate moments with loved ones.

[@georg7120]

How do you know what is "God's word"?

[@csmoviles]

May GOD bless this ministry. Those who don't want GOD to be true, had to come with something to destroy the verse, which states clearly, that the very creation testifies of a Creator. Well, who has eyes may see; and who has ears may hear

[@ClifffSVK]

It's funny because science is based on objective observations (what we see and hear in nature), while there is no evidence for God. The goal of science is not to destroy anything. The goal is to gain verifiable knowledge. If there was even a tiny piece of scientific evidence for God, then science would have to acknowledge it. But so far we have nothing. Maybe it's you who should reconsider your worldview, not us.

[@Samanthasupernovaa]

I really love that you bring on actual scientists to prove the Bible. It’s awesome 😊

[@tennislite]

Evolution is not about mutations, it is more about natural selection.

[@jamesjohnson7905]

The problem is mankind has now had enough time to observe animals mutate and be more successful than the original. Just the fact that that there are different races of humans all with different physical traits. If it wasn't for mutation we would all be black

[@tenringrey267]

I hope you watched the video. It's covered.

[@MatthewPeeters-l7i]

Racism-a consequence of evolution? - creation.com/racism-consequence-evolution

[@jamesjohnson7905]

@tenringrey267 after god killed everyone on the planet except noah and his family. It must have come as a big surprise to noahs sons when their wife's gave birth to Chinese , inuit, north American Indian, ploynesian, ect. Because I don't remember God making anymore humans

[@jamesjohnson7905]

@tenringrey267 my mutations are blonde blue eyes left handed and 6feet 4 inches

[@pigzcanfly444]

@jamesjohnson7905 so you're suggesting that anyone that is not black is better or more successful? It's kind of an odd hill to die on. Mutations are vastly more likely to be deleterious and destructive than effectively neutral and certainly more than beneficial assumed mutations. I recommend reading the articles from the NIH, PubMed, NCBI, and PNAS concerning the topic of "mutator genome decay," which directly contradicts your understanding of how things operate.

[@beefsupreme4671]

Mutations are loss of information not increasing information. This fact makes the idea of evolution impossible

[@rizdekd3912]

@@beefsupreme4671 no not all changes are losses in information. So it’s not a fact. Some are rearrangements that result in changes that are not deleterious. They end up causing different features and differences in features. EG duplication doesn’t result in a loss of information but an increase in information. The duplicated genetic material is then available for future selection processes that could lead to new features.

[@beefsupreme4671]

@@rizdekd3912 except that all the changes caused by chance are a loss of information. Your idea that a a change may have a benefit means it is not a loss of information means you do not know what information is.

[@beefsupreme4671]

@@rizdekd3912 a change that makes a new structure would be new information. This has never been observed. You only believe that it has happened because of blind faith.

[@rizdekd3912]

@@beefsupreme4671 I believe it has happened because I have faith God could have designed life so it could evolve.

[@beefsupreme4671]

@@rizdekd3912 except the Bible specifically says life does not evolve. All life reproduces after its kinds. See Genesis 1:24

[@blank-964]

👍

[@kristyclonts2799]

When Darwinism and the " Age of Enlightenment " sprouted up a couple of 100 yrs ago our understanding of simple biology was still in the dark ages . Praise God that He gave us such passion for curiosity to know that even through these brilliant minds ( and I mean that , absolutley brilliant minds ) of the secular scientists ( and also a great contribution by the very dogmatic Creationist scientists who took the rebuffing or simply kept their beliefs to themselves - all that to say God our Creator gave us incredible ability ) Fast forward present , we now have MORE THAN ENOUGH evidence to place Darwin's theory on the burn pile of history . It does not , cannot explain its main objective of how , when , where ,why .... it's so embarrassingly lacking that its proponents scurry away and hide behind papers published in the 70's ... And I get it , they're embarrassed and they cannot bow to the authority of Creator Jehovah , Spoken into existence by Christ our King .

[@JumpingJack-w2l]

This guy was used in an earlier video, about salt or something.

[@AdamMcLennan-tl7kg]

Call "ancient races" closer to the human ancestry and watch them melt. The first nations peoples are closer to pre- humans (as could be asserted) would be considered as being "racist" 9:49

[@geraldhamilton8896]

Science is not bad, but people need to stop trying to use it to be God. Let God be God!

[@CaseyCovenant]

Please make Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels 2 !!! Would love to see a sequel !!!

[@maikeru1990]

X2 !!

[@jollyjester3923]

It's too hard to follow his example at 6:00, what's he talking about, "control system"? He talks fast, there's no visuals. Am I susposed to imagine everything he's saying about how antibiotics work?

[@23Raind]

If this is too hard to follow, use the links and show notes in the description which includes a free documentary (lots of visuals) that all cover this topic.

[@jollyjester3923]

@@23Raind Sorry, I can't find the video you're talking about. What's he talking about, "heaps and heaps". He just started talking really fast with his example and it's hard to follow, because the person watching the video is required to imagine what he is talking about every step of the way second by second without any pictures or visuals.

[@JesusIsKING7140]

Please when you have this gentleman on can you adjust the microphone to cut out his high pitched s wistle, its very painfull to listen to for those of us with sensitive hearing i could not finish it sadly. 🙏✝️👍

[@mrsmith4662]

It is so obvious, but what have else have atheists got to believe in?

[@2l84me8]

@@mrsmith4662 It’s not obvious and atheism has nothing to do with evolution. Even the Catholic Church accepts evolution by natural selection.

[@ben-str]

And they tell us the bible is a fairy tale book. All the while they believe that Evolution is how we got here.

[@2l84me8]

@@ben-str Atheism and evolution have absolutely nothing to do with each other. And evolution explains the diversity of life, not “how we got here”.

[@ben-str]

@@2l84me8 "Atheism and evolution have absolutely nothing to do with each other." You mean atheists don't believe in evolution?! How shocking?!

[@ben-str]

@@2l84me8 “how we got here” I know, you drove here. Got it.

[@solidifyyourfaith9610]

Who is being interviewed?

[@usergiodmsilva1983PT]

A big liar.

[@rexgoodheart3471]

Sorry, but this was probably the dumbest thing I've seen on this channel. Yes, many (most) mutations are harmful. But one that improved eyesight, for example, would increase the survivability of a species. It's truly sad how people don't know what "natural selection" actually means.

[@edwardjackson9791]

Dr. Walt Brown has a theory of hydroplate theory that in part has the radioactive production in the granitic crust. If that occurred then that would explain the reduction of life spans post flood.

[@tmoxie77]

Very interested in this. Where do you suggest I go to learn more about it? Thanks in advance!

[@masada2828]

@@tmoxie77- search u tube for the series (6) of Walt Brown’s hydroplate theory.

[@JustThisPivot]

His thinking is based on emotion. He has difficulty coping with large numbers and small probabilities. Yet, they exist. Does this gentleman deny the existence of the universe on the basis that it is 'impossible' for it to exist because an 'unimaginable' number of elements would need to come together to form it?

[@tenringrey267]

Yes, it is impossible for the universe to exist WITHOUT A DESIGNER, that is God.

[@JustThisPivot]

@@tenringrey267 Yes, the universe is that kind of mystery, but not life, because life is nothing more than the universe organized into living form.

[@jensswales]

​@@JustThisPivotis your claim also part of universal organisation?

[@JustThisPivot]

@@Mario_Sky_521 Not only is life complex, but the universe is also complex, and we still know very little (though we know more than mere wind and dust). However, there are laws that organize both the universe and life, and the universe is so vast that our brains struggle to comprehend all the numbers and probabilities. It's no surprise that God seems simpler for our brains to grasp, which is likely why the concept was 'discovered' so early. We know some laws of the universe, and we can replicate and test them. We cannot replicate or test anything about God. So, how probable is God's existence? Yet, you believe in this fantasy. I am not worried about probabilities because the laws of the universe have the intrinsic potential to form both the universe and life, and the evidence is everywhere. That's all that's needed-certainly not nothing. We learn bit by bit, and I am both happy and patient with that.

[@jameskohl7959]

The 2024 Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, and in Physiology or Medicine forced theorists and theologians to admit that light-matter interactions at the origin of life link quantum coherence to coherently organized biology via protection from the virus-driven degradation of mRNA, which links mutations to all pathology. What prevented this from happening during the past decades of scientific progress linked to model organisms from C.elegans to cancer-free African elephants via miRNA abundance and 20 copies of p53?

[@TickedOffPriest]

How does natural selection occur if not for these imaginary benefitial mutations?

[@MatthewPeeters-l7i]

Natural selection produces variation by elimination of information. Consider a pair of dogs with medium length hair, capable of giving birth to dogs with both longer and shorter hair, living in a cold environment like Alaska. The short haired dogs are going to struggle, while the long haired dogs will thrive. With time, only long haired dogs capable of giving birth to long haired dogs will remain. Only the dogs capable of surviving the cold due to their long hair are able to reproduce, culling out short haired genes. The opposite would happen in a hot environment, leading to variation. Instead of creatures evolving to suit their environment, the environment kills of the creatures that are not suited to that environment. The creatures can never gain information from their environment, they can only lose the information that is carried by the unsuccessful carriers of that information. Here's some articles from CMI that you may find interesting. Variation and natural selection versus evolution - creation.com/rech2 Natural selection - creation.com/natural-selection

[@rubiks6]

Chemistry executes programs. It doesn't create them.

[@John-gi7qk]

Mutations are not a problem for Godzilla and the radio active bugs.

[@ByTheGraceofGOD777-u7o]

“I have made the Earth, And Created man upon it: I, even MY Hands, Have Stretched out the heavens, And ‘A-L-L’ their host have I Commanded.” ~ The LORD ~ (Isaiah 45:12) ~~~ “I AM The LORD, and there is NONE Else, There is no ‘God’ beside ME: I ‘Girded’ thee, Though thou hast ‘Not’ known ME.” (Isaiah 45:5) ~~~ :o ~~~ “NO ‘Serious’ Scientist thinks that Life began by ‘Chance’.” ~ Dr. Stephen C. Meyer/Signature in the Cell ~~~ “Atheism is a fairy story for people afraid of the LIGHT.” ~ Prof John Lennox ~~~ “Evolution is the Central and Radical LIE In the whole ‘Web of Falsehood’ that now governs our lives.” ~ C.S. Lewis ~~~ :o

[@sanjosejeff]

And consciousness just miraculous appeared one day🙄

[@globalcoupledances]

Caused by three mutations

[@jameskohl7959]

@@globalcoupledances In theory, it mathemagically evolved after energy automagically emerged from the cosmic void.

[@globalcoupledances]

@@jameskohl7959 That violates the 1st Law of Thermodynamics

[@tomesplin4130]

Amazingly, humans and fish have 70% of their genome in common. Humans and gorillas share 98% of their genome. Did God use evolutionary processes? The genome would suggest this.

[@ryanleeoakes2015]

@@tomesplin4130 that goes to show you the vast complexity of information in a genome if 96-98% gets you the difference between a chimp, gorilla and a human. It’s an example of mind boggling complexity. Where did all that come from? Not looking for “sky daddy” back handed comments here. Where did the information come from?

[@tomesplin4130]

@@ryanleeoakes2015 Definitely is mind boggling complexity and amazing design. I observe a highly intelligent universe and convinced of God designing the natural processes to achieve His creation as we see it today.

[@kristyclonts2799]

Question for our very talented scientist .. Don't humans see far TOO WELL to be explained by the opposing Natural uniformitarians ...? I would suspect our vision to be that very similar to other mammals ( I think I've heard of some creatures sharing in our ability of color range -- or can see some color ) and also if we " evolved " why would Nature be so cruel as to take away our NIGHT VISION or ability to see in infrared as so many lesser animals do ...

[@globalcoupledances]

All primates see all three colors. That is evidence of evolution from a common ancestor

[@edwardjackson9791]

If it weren’t for the cross of Jesus Christ evolution would have been abandoned 100 years ago.

[@bwtv147]

I once toured Europe. It seemed like half the churches had a relic of the true cross. It made me think that during the crusades every Jew operating a souvenir stand was selling relics of the true cross.

[@fuzzycounsellor9147]

@@bwtv147 Trying to figure out what benefit a piece of the cross would have. This pathetic tradition/dogma of the RCC is an abomination. Same for the orthodox. This is pure blasphemy superstition that bring ridicule on the Christian faith they say they practice but do not.

[@globalcoupledances]

Funniest relic is the foreskin of Jesus. Wikipedia has an article about the Holy Prepuce

[@globalcoupledances]

@@andrewdavies7827 Funny Wikipedia artticle "Holy Prepuce"

[@HectorWallace777]

Phenotypical variations are the basis of what makes natural selection work as a function of evolution. This has nothing to do with genetic mutations, which I would agree have negative effects on the organism. However, such a mutation together with associated environmental conditions may benefit the organism.

[@SteveLomas-k6k]

Of course; a bear that LOSES the ability to produce pigment in it's fur may have an advantage in the Arctic. But you see the problem here, you cannot evolve a bacteria into a human being by merely losing genetic functions already found in the bacteria. You need the exact opposite phenomena from what we observe occurring through mutation.

[@23Raind]

Circumstantially beneficial mutations are rare, and always come paired with a large number of low impact beneficial mutations. Near neutral mutations are invisible to natural selection and accumulate unchecked. Circumstantially beneficial mutations do not overcome this.

[@SteveLomas-k6k]

@@23Raind did you mean- 'come paired with a large number of low impact negative mutations?'

[@Mark_72]

To add to the complexity of life, it requires a male and a female with the big difference it implies for each gender. I’ve only heard of some insects that can reproduce with only one entity.

[@spamm0145]

Evolution requires a complete ignorance of the insurmountable paradoxes that need to be overcome, how did the first DNA come into existence when DNA is made from proteins and DNA is required to make the proteins. A single cell has comparable complexity to a city like New York, a living nano city, and yet the evolutionists want us all to believe it created itself without the need for a designer.

[@usergiodmsilva1983PT]

Bacteria don't have genders. Snails and slugs have both. There are lizards which only have females. Sorry bub, go grab a biology book.

[@steveswan5714]

Is evil part of evolution or should that be called evilution

[@John-gi7qk]

Is it the Incredible Hulk?

[@vernoncleveland6806]

Thank you for sharing. God bless y’all.

[@csmoviles]

❤❤❤❤

[@richardmackay4369]

Christians all, be wary of this guy, whoever he might be. I’m 2minutes in only and already sick of his misinformation, can’t stomach any more. Just for reference, he specifies single nucleotide variations as if they’re the only mutation (no doubt he realises there are many more options than that, he just doesn’t say so). Like all apologists, never any mention of the role of epigenetics. I can think of numerous mutations which are beneficial to those humans living in a particular environment. Aussies are more intelligent than this outfit, so they must be a tiny minority.

[@tenringrey267]

His point stands for any kind of mutation.

[@pigzcanfly444]

@richardmackay4369 you would do well to research the term "mutator genome decay" as dubbed by the NIH, PubMed, NCBI, and PNAS. It directly contradicts your OP and beliefs concerning how mutations affect our physiology and epigenetic regions of our DNA. Don't write off the man for an unwarranted assumption that is not backed by genetics data.

[@richardmackay4369]

Pigscanfly - excellent constructive suggestion, I don’t know that term, I’ll check it out.

[@richardmackay4369]

@@Mario_Sky_521 1. Most mutations by far cause no perceptible harm. 2. There are well known beneficial sequence variations - look up “hereditary lactase persistence”. 3. Deletion of the apterous gene in Drosophila makes them wingless. Replacement with the closely similar human homologue LHX2 (which is involved in CNS architecture in humans) doesn’t cause Drosophila to be unexpectedly intelligent…….it makes them grow wings! (Comment in Lancet 2003;362:477-84).

[@richardmackay4369]

@@pigzcanfly444 I’ve had a look at “mutator genome decay” following your suggestion, I’ll readily admit a fairly casual one as nothing seemed to merit a deeper look relevant to this discussion. It seems to apply to a class of hypermutable phenotypes in some microbes - clinical isolates, endosymbiosis, laboratory experiments, cancer cells - and frequently associated with inactivating mutations in DNA maintenance, replication and repair mechanisms. Bacteria are usually able to reproduce asexually, so these features spread readily in a population particularly if there are minimal selection pressures. This is irrelevant to you and me who never had or will have mutator genomes until we get cancer. Or at least our cancer cells will, our germ cells will not. So I cannot identify why you think this is relevant. PNAS is a scientific journal. NCBI provides access to genomic information, especially their databases like BLAST, GenBank, OMIM, as well as interfaces like PubMed/Medline; NIH is a research funding organisation with vast faculties. What on earth has that got to do with mutator genomes, except that they accept that it is a thing? It looks like a “thing” to me too.

[@georg7120]

He doesn't mention that these processes take millions of years.

[@telwood15]

You can't mention everything in a short video.

[@georg7120]

@@telwood15 But omitting facts that are in favour of the theory you criticise is wrong.

[@steveswan5714]

What mutations created eyes and where they doing this at the same time as other mutations where creating holes in the skull 🤔 and also doing it double 🤯 what incredible faith you need to be an atheist 😂

[@rubiks6]

Mutations did not creat eyes. Genetic code creates eyes. All mutations can do is break eyes. My sister has a mutation that makes her blind.

[@steveswan5714]

@@KrisMaertens Wikipedia 🤣 you have to get a life if you trust that ! What about over billions of years or even trillions 🤔 it's incredible how the world has aged so much over the last hundred years ? God tells us in His word Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; That includes you and me, some sin is secret and we think no one knows, but God can see everything and He will let you know that soon 🙏 I just it's when you are a believer 🤔

[@steveswan5714]

I have most likely done more studies than you have years on this planet I will leave you until God shows you your sin🙏

[@winterroadspokenword4681]

I believe in God, but I’m yet to be convinced by his arguments. I’ve no emotional bias towards creationism as I wasn’t brought up in religion. This far; I feel all the scientists who discredit evolution, are too biased and haven’t done enough self work and grown close enough to god. This man Don. Seems a little preoccupied with that it doesn’t work. But science should still be able to explain how it does work. I feel the argument against evolution is weak. I look forward to hearing a better argument in future as that will help me draw the scientific mind closer to my spiritual soul :)

[@ClifffSVK]

Science is not based on arguments and logical assumptions, but on objective observations and experiments. You can't just argue your theory into science. It needs to be a working model. You can spot the pseudoscience when these religious "scientists" talk about the DNA as a programming language, or cells as factories, and so on. They're comparing nature to man-made concepts, not the other way around. Well, what came to existence first, programming languages or the DNA? If you're developing a theory about a natural phenomenon, you should stay away from comparisons to man-made concepts, as it will introduce false assumptions.

[@stevelever83]

Mutations are needed for evolution!

[@jamesjohnson7905]

@@stevelever83 agreed if not for mutations we would be a mono culture like a field of wheat zero differences

[@Tall-Cool-Drink]

An evolution would say given enough time, a mutation can be beneficial and be passed on to the next generation.

[@23Raind]

That's true, but the issue is not strictly beneficial as high impact beneficial mutations can still reduce the specificity of the genome; and any animal who passed on a beneficial mutation will also pass on its new and old deleterious mutations and the next generation will have many new deleterious mutations along with the 1 positive. Thus deleterious mutations accumulate far more rapidly regardless of whether or not the occasional beneficial mutation (which can still be deleterious) is added. This is the issue with mutations. Natural selection can only remove high impact bad mutations while the population as a whole continues to add low impact mutations that are invisible to natural selection. Thus the population degenerates in a roughly uniform fashion with the decline from one generation to the next being minor, but overall say 1,000 generations the impact has added up to something extreme, but at this point, there's no way to reverse it as there are no members of the population who have a notable enough lower mutation count to be selected over the others. Mutations+ time = degeneration. The mutations are too low impact for natural selection to be in the equation.

[@poliincredible770]

The Bible gives us logical answers. Darwinism gives us comic books like X-Men.

[@rizdekd3912]

Unless the process the Bible describes IS evolution and God used evolution to produce the variety of life on earth. Perhaps that is what God was trying to say when he inspired phrases like “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” He meant to be saying that he fine tuned the natural world so well that it could produce life and all the variety of life we see today. That would have been an incredible feat, right? I mean, many creationists even claim evolution that has happened since the flood is how the few animals Noah could've carried on the ark could have become the great diversity of life we now see. In which case, Darwinism, as you call it, is simply recognizing a process God created.

[@troywalstra9300]

​@@rizdekd391226 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (Genesis 1:26-27, KJV) And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Genesis 2:7, KJV)

[@poliincredible770]

@@rizdekd3912 we can observe that a great variety of variations can occur within each kind (taxonomic family) of creature, but no scientist has observed a transition of one kind (taxonomic family) to another. So yes, we can see two dogs produce a variety of dogs, and that is confirmation that what the Bible prescribes is accurate: that dogs produce after their kind. But no scientist has observed a dog transition to the point where it resulted in the birth of a cat. So we have a 100% success rate for the Biblical prescription and a 0% success rate for the darwinian prescription. The irony is if the Bible was to say the dogs on the ark transitioned to become cats over many years, atheists would be able to say, "That's ridiculous, no one has ever seen a dog transition into a cat." Yet here we are with creationists being ridiculed for adhering to observable, testable, repeatable biological occurrences.

[@ClifffSVK]

​@@poliincredible770 If you think evolution is when dogs give birth to cats, then you should be reading something instead of writing right now. You're well misinformed about the topic.

[@poliincredible770]

@@ClifffSVK I never said anything about dogs giving birth to cats. Straw man much?

[@larrycarter3765]

Evolution is correct.

[@jacobostapowicz8188]

Do You believe a mindless process invented the variety and assortment of fruits and vegetables, herbs and spices, fungi and tree nuts, wheats and grains? How? Do you believe a mindless process invented poison and venom productions in plants and creatures? How?

[@globalcoupledances]

@jacobostapowicz8188 - yes, nature/natural_selection doesn't have a mind

[@junacebedo888]

Mutations WORKS!! Mutate a German shepherd dog into a small tiny dog. And, crooks won't steal your home by curiously admiring your toy dog.

[@eladio_cro_warface]

​@@joefriday2275from dog to dog ..lol

[@globalcoupledances]

@joefriday2275 - Homo Sapiens, Homo Neanderthalensis are species. Homo is a genus

[@23Raind]

​@@globalcoupledancesnot separate species. Modern homosapiens and neanderthals freely interbred, thus according to the biological species concept, they are the same species. Essentially this means the neanderthal is just a race that died out as they interbred with a much larger population that moved into the area.

[@globalcoupledances]

@23Raind - speciation is not always 100%. Fertility decreases if the couple are too remote. Great Dane and tiny dogs. Only daughters of Neanderthal father and Sapiens mother survived

[@tomesplin4130]

There are good mutations and bad mutations. What have we learnt from COVID mutating…?

[@globalcoupledances]

@joefriday2275 - virus mutates. That is why new vaccines are necessary

[@globalcoupledances]

@tomesplin4130 - virus multiplies, evolves. You just reject vaccination

[@pigzcanfly444]

​@@globalcoupledancesviruses need a host in order to propagate so he had a valid point.

[@globalcoupledances]

@@pigzcanfly444 And you need a home, a bed etc. And do you need food?

[@pigzcanfly444]

@@globalcoupledances the point he made is that viruses aren't alive. They on fact need a host prior to doing anything to propagate. Is this such a costly fact that you cannot reconcile your beliefs to match it?

[@alicelund147]

If a god or gods, or other supernatural powers, continuously add genes to give evolution something to work with; what god is that? It is nothing in the Old or new Testament that even remotely resembles this theory so it can't be the Christian God.

[@pigzcanfly444]

He never said that new genes were introduced or added. He said the genomes are constantly decaying and this is backed by clinical medical research and a plethora of genetics studies like the Richard Lenski LTEE and the work of Craig Venter on his synthetic "cell" Synthia. I recommend reading articles from the NIH, PubMed, NCBI and PNAS regarding this subject dubbed by them "mutator genome decay". You will see that what the man in the video has said is true.

[@alicelund147]

@@pigzcanfly444 I am commenting on him saying it was done by God. He acknowledges that the genes in more primitive organisms is not enough to drive the evolution in for example mammals. He also acknowledges evolution. I agree he has a point, it is difficult to explain only with mutations. But he means it proves God did it. But my point is that if a god did it it is not the Christian God because that religion have nothing of this. According to that religion everything was created complete from the beginning and in a few days. And I get the impression when he say God he means Christianity. He does not mean Odin and his 2 brothers. The Old Testament creation myth is not closer to genes, evolution and mutations than any other of thousands of creation myths.

[@pigzcanfly444]

@alicelund147 so your bias against the proposition that God exists is your only reason for commenting? Everyone has a bias, and understanding your bias and how it can affect interpretations of data will help you to reflect on this decision better. If your issue is that this man believes that God is the ultimate cause for these phenomenon that has nothing to do with the points made in the video regarding how mutations do not introduce new genotypic information, and are in a constant state of genomic decay. Regardless, your comment is off-topic and doesn't deal with the content of the video.

[@alicelund147]

@@pigzcanfly444 So it could be any god or gods? He does not refer to the Christian God?

[@pigzcanfly444]

@@alicelund147 that is irrelevant to the discussion. You are moving a red herring into the topic to deviate from what the topic of the video truly is and what is shown by the genetics data. The genomes are all decaying as a fact of scientific inquiry into the field of genetics and various gene sequencing and tracking experiments.

[@imankhandaker6103]

Mutations are the engine of creation.

[@Sydneysss]

Like what cancer?

[@globalcoupledances]

@joefriday2275 - sickle cell allele leads to resistance against malaria, survival. Cancer is caused by turning on DNA-polymerase. Normal cells can turn it off. Bipedalism is caused by turning on at the right moment in chondrocytes. Result of mutation. Nature selected that mutation to survive

[@imankhandaker6103]

​@@SydneysssLike predatory honeycreepers, evolving due to the absence of normal avian predators on the Hawaiian archipelago.

[@imankhandaker6103]

@@joefriday2275 ...which confers a 90% improvement in survival against malaria - because the twisted RBCs leak the nutrients Plasmodium Falciparum need to survive. An elegant demonstration of evolution by mutation. Any more ignorant comments?

[@imankhandaker6103]

@@joefriday2275 Google sickle cell anemia. The reason the gene survives in Africa is the differential edge it gives against malaria. Malaria is the single greatest killer in human history - anything that fights it will LENGTHEN life. Malaria kills in 5-7 DAYS...anemia takes YEARS. What is TRULY stupid, are people who think that their limited experience across one lifetime - outweighs the accumulated wisdom of the entire human race, over its entire history. One day I hope your confidence is put to the test, in a situation where your life depends on your choices.

[@krazzy4u]

Who Created the Super Intelligent Creator?

[@biosciencegeek5057]

A baker baked the cake. But who baked the baker? An engineer made a computer but why can I not see him in the computer? The creator of the cake or engineer of the computer are not defined or restricted by their creations. Similarly, your question does not take into account of an eternal, immaterial yet sovereign and all-powerful being.

[@fuzzycounsellor9147]

@@biosciencegeek5057 Yep, God is spirit so looking to the natural world for answers about how a Spirit creates has serious limitations. Mostly in that natural man lacks the capacity to perceive in anyway the spirit real unless given this gift by the All Mighty. And even then it is faith based. But none of that is required to see that the evolution theory of the cosmo is complete hokum. To prove something wrong does not require you have the answer. Just that you falsify the claim of the theory presented. And evolution is complete bunk. Same for virology & contagion.

[@sciencementor786]

@@biosciencegeek5057 creatures are made of physical materials. Creator is meta physical.

[@oikoslibre6497]

Consciousness created itself in the evolution that preceded the universe

[@23Raind]

​@@biosciencegeek5057Yep, if I find a super computer and nuclear power plant on Mars, I am not justified in saying they weren't designed because I can't find the alien, or know how the alien came to exist. Those are important questions, but they have nothing to do with whether or not those structures were created by an intelligent agent.

[@woobykal68]

Google definition of mutation: Any change in the DNA sequence of a cell. Mutations may be caused by mistakes during cell division, or they may be caused by exposure to DNA-damaging agents in the environment. There are no good mutations. Mutations damage and destroy, not the other way around.

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

Mutations can actually be beneficial; for example, a polar bear's white fur comes from a faulty pigment gene, and this gives it excellent camouflage in the Arctic. However, mutation simply doesn't work as the engine of evolution, which is what I think you are getting at!

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

@@joefriday2275 Yes exactly!

[@woobykal68]

@@SheridanFalkenberry Wrong!!!!!!! Thats adaptation. You evolutionist always confuse adaptation with mutations.

[@SteveLomas-k6k]

@@joefriday2275 It's difficult to identify any clear exceptions to this rule, they are certainly overwhelmingly reductive..

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

@@woobykal68 I actually work for this channel :) We have some content coming that touches on this topic.