How could man ever evolve by mutations (mistakes) in the first place??

Question

"If Evolution is true, science has a big problem. How could man ever evolve by mutations (mistakes) in the first place, since that process would have made everyone's children deformed? the mere fact that people can produce offspring that are NOT largely deformed is a testimony to creation, not Evolution." And the HYPOTHESIS of Evolution has much bigger problems than that.

Ronin - thats not a mutation that would be evolution with a lower case e. changes within a species. not changes from one species to another.

Answer 1

with logic like this i dont understand why atheists make fun of christians

Answer 2

and how many mathematical theorums, medications, etc. were discovered by accident?

Evolution is random changes. Depending on how the environment changes a mutation can help or hinder an organism. Something that may be a hinderance may turn into a life saving change if the environment changes enough. Sickle cell anemia is a mutation that is a life saver in certain environments and is a killer in others.

Oh. You want big E evolution. It doesn't exist the way creationists claim. It is a sequence of small e evolutions between 2 populations of the same species that after generations become unable to interbreed, thus you get big E evolution. Cats don't evolve into dogs, only creationists believe that.

Answer 3

Two big things wrong with your train of thought.
1) Virtually every person does, in fact, carry at LEAST one mutation. Most are harmless. Some are harmful. Others are helpful.
2) Over great tracts of time, the part you are forgetting, those random mutations built up in the genome of every organism, and speciation was the result. We aren't talking about 100,000 years here, we are talking about 3.5 billion, that's billion, with a b, years, and the incomprehensible number of generations in each species present today.

Time is evolution's biggest means of action, that and sexual reproduction. The number of reasons that support evolution are incredible. I'm not going to go more in depth with my answer because I could easily take hundreds of pages to just scratch the surface of the evidence, and I frankly do not feel like spending time explaining a simple concept to someone completly closed minded to the possibility of it being true. And don't say you are open minded, because based on just the phrasing of your question, you aren't. Not now, and likely not ever.

I know you probably never will, but I strongly encourage you to take an advanced biology course. Once you know the M.O. of evolution, and understand all the variables involved, you'll see that religion and evolution are not at war, only the people who know little about either side are at war. In fact, in my mind the two sync up quite nicely. Science picks up where religion leaves off, and religion picks up where science leaves off.

Answer 4

Then don't use any of science's advances. Evolution is the theory all science is based on. So drink your water from a stream or lake, don't go to a doctor or dentist, don't use a computer because all of our technology is based on Evolution.

One part of the theory is the survival of the fittest. If a mutation gives an organism better skills, that mutation is good and will help the offspring to survive.

Answer 5

Not all mutations are harmful. Sometime they create a slightly larger organism, a smaller finger to get at bugs, a lighter wing, more fur, less fur, it all depends on the area dn the organism whether it will help or hurt.

And as for the ability to have offspring without defects, why did over 50% of children die before age 1 in the US just 100 years ago? Are we really such a perfect creation? Why do 1 in 8 births start as twins? Why so many miscarriages? Not so perfect honey, but thanx for playing.

Answer 6

Evolution is a theory, not a hypothesis. It means it is proven scientific fact.

Mutations take a lot time to occur. The rate of mutation you see in the X-Men, for example, is unrealistic and does not happen in nature.

Mutations that helped evolve people were generally more the type that made us faster, strong, and smarter, not grow a third limb. And why is this? Well, lets just say God planned it that way.

Answer 7

Your question shows that you think the evolution is driven ONLY by mutation. You need to learn about the concept of "natural selection". Surely you've heard of it?

NeoDarwinian theory has a random element - mutation - and a non-random element - selection. If you don't understand the interplay of the random and the non-random elements of the theory, then you don't understand the theory.

You also seem to think that mutations are synonymous with deformities, even though everyone you know likely has a few mutations in their genetic code.

Answer 8

On the contrary, the fact that people can produce fertile offspring perfectly supports evolutionary theory. Although many mutations are harmful and can result in deformity, weakness, or death, some mutations are beneficial. According to evolutionary theory, an individual with a beneficial mutation will be better adapted to its environment, is more likely to survive than individuals without the mutation, and is able to produce more offspring than individuals lacking the mutation. For example, let's say that an ape-like ancestor of modern humans was born on the border of a forest and a grassland. This individual was born with a mutation that changed something in its foot or leg structure, but in this case this unusual "deformity" allowed the individual to walk better on open ground than the other members of its species. This individual would be able to move out of the forested area, or at least travel into the grassland to gather food. This individual would therefore be able to provide more food for itself and would likewise be able to better provide food for its offspring, some of which would inherit this trait. Over time, the mutation-bearing descendents of the original individual with the mutation will outcompete the non-mutated individuals for resources, and only the better adapted individuals will survive. It is through the constant repetition of this process that today's species, including humans, have evolved. Surely, you are right in saying that mutation has been detrimental in many cases throughout evolutionary history, but only relatively few beneficial mutations are necessary to allow evolution to occur.
I think there is rather compelling evidence for evolution. We know for a fact that genetic mutations do occur. We have found fossils of many extinct species, including a walking fish and an amphibious cow-like whale ancestor. Many species possess structures, such as the whale hip bone, that serve absolutely no purpose in their present form but which remain from evolutionary ancestors. In the whale's case, the small useless hip bone is what remains of the hip bone of its land-dwelling ancestor. Artificial selection performed by humans also demonstrates how species can change over time when influenced by selective pressures. For example, modern corn was produced, through human efforts, over several hundred years from a very different plant called teosinte.
Even though evolution may be disturbing to some people, I think there is too much evidence for it to simply deny that evolution has occurred. However, although evolution can be used to argue that God was not necessary in the process of creation, I also think it can be reconciled with Christianity if one doesn't follow a rigid interpretation of the Bible. What is a day to God could be a billion years to humans, and God's six days of creation could have been 6 billion years of evolution controlled by Him. In addition, can you imagine God trying to explain evolution to Abraham or Moses at a time when humans had virtually no scientific understanding of the world? Certainly, evolution can be uncomfortable to deal with, but we cannot deny something simply because it is inconvenient or disturbing.

Answer 9

Mutations are not necessarily deformities. Children are often taller then their parents, it's not a deformity but it can be seen as an evolution feature. If a child is stronger , more flexible or more athletic than his parents , all those thing, in my opinion can be counted as tiny steps toward evolution.

Answer 10

From the hyperlink... "this can be a severe misstatement of the creationist argument. the difficulty isn't new characteristics, yet new genetic assistance. In no prevalent case is antibiotic resistance the outcome of latest assistance. There are countless techniques that an assistance loss can confer resistance, as already stated." some physicist changed into after me in this element, asserting that "language can not evolve" - not from scratch a minimum of (people have innate language expertise). And this can be an exquisite question. 'The foundation of which ability'. Biology is finished of glaring which ability (assistance) - particular diversifications and glaring 'layout' as an celebration. i exploit the words 'which ability', 'assistance' and 'language' to advise variety of equivalent issues. actual I trust creationists for asking difficult philosophical questions (even if I completely disagree with their causes for doing so). besides the actuality that I pulled out is way extra interesting than your question, it quite is in ordinary words a imprecise and faulty re-phraseology of the above. How did which ability come even as there changed into none? Creationists say... Ah... the language of God. the top. besides, your call for sharing concepts is real - no concept ought to require lack of understanding with the intention to be sustained. we ought to continually have interaction in loose and open debate about concepts. the actual undeniable actuality that 'Darwinism' has some unresolved difficult philosophical questions isn't grounds for creationism - its merely that our modern-day 'merely excellent' (maximum customary) theory isn't proper. - truly a variety of of the usual public (atheist and xtian alike are unaware of Darwinism). reading proteins you fairly commence to get a sense for 'how evolution works', or perhaps although some proteins 'seem' faster or later in the heritage of earth (novel applications 'emerge') - it isn't unreasonable, i think, to posit that those new applications were the made from evolution - Darwinian, Gouldian or otherwise - the made from a blind actual procedure, and not in any respect a guided act of creation. speaking about the transformations between the animals is a 'straw guy' if ever there changed into one. understand evolution on the protein element, then on the point of the genetic regulatory community, and also you realize the evolution of existence on earth. Sorry if i bypass on, yet i comprehend that in accordance on your high quality concepts you'll study and attempt to understand what I actually have written.

Answer 11

Evolution is not a hypothesis; it's a theory. And scientific theory by definition does not mean that it needs to be proven still; it's something that has already been accepted.

Evolution is very real--even viruses do it to survive in the human body to evade medication. If you studied changes in the human genome, you'd know it too.