Harmful mutations outnumber 1 beneficial mutations one million to one. 2 This fact, together with the fact that most mutations are invisible to natural selection, provides strong evidence that we are degrading, not improving as evolution would say.
Site Under Construction
This site is still under construction. It needs more references, citations, and debate arguments. If you would like to help, please view the community page.
Coyne, J. A. (2009). Why Evolution Is True. New York: Viking.
Sanford, J. C., & Baumgardner, J. (2008). Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome (3rd ed.). Waterloo, NY: FMS Publications.
- Coyne, 2009, p. 118: “Mutations are simply errors in DNA replication. Most of them are harmful or neutral, but a few can turn out to be useful. The useful ones are the raw material for evolution. But there is no know biological way to jack up the probability that a mutation will meet the current adaptive needs of the organism. Although it’s better for mice living on sand dunes to have lighter coats, their chance of getting such a useful utation is no higher than for mice living on dark soil. Rather than calling mutations “random,” then, it seems more accurate to call them “indifferent”: the chance of a mutation arising is indifferent to whether it would be helpful to the individual.” ↩
- Sanford, 2008, p. 24 ↩