Mutations disprove the theory of upward evolution

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

Annnnnd, once again, SBGTF comes at us with standard, much refuted creationist nonsense.

Mutations disprove the theory of upward evolution

No, mutations are one of the mechanisms by which evolution occurs

According to atheistic origin science, all species today have evolved upward through a succession of ancestor species.

Not 'upward', there's no direction or purpose to the evolutionary mechanism of mutation.

So all the DNA codes in all species living today are the product of many past generations going back hundreds of millions of years.

Yes.

Mutations are errors in the DNA code.

Wrong. Mutations are changes, not errors.

These mutations will accumulate in the DNA code of each species. There is no original to compare with and correct these errors.

No correction is needed, mutations aren't errors.

Natural selection is no help because all the individual creatures are accumulating mutations.

No help with what? Correcting 'errors'? Natural selection is the process by which the accumulated capabilities of an individual, including any unique attributes (mutations) may be 'tested' against its survival criteria. In that context, it's the ultimate help. In terms of your misdefinitions, it's absolutely irrelevant.

Now consider mankind. Each person receives at least 30 mutations to their DNA code. That is the mutation rate per generation.

Actually, the mutation rate per individual is FAR higher than that but let's see what you have to say next...

Supposedly mankind and all land animals evolved from some creature from the sea that lived about 500 million years ago. Take the average intergeneration time of at most 10 years. That represents 50 million generations. Now multiple the number of generations by the mutation rate per generation. That yields about 1.5 billion mutations. Now some of these will happen at the same code location and some will even be corrected by the double accident. So take 2/3 of that and you get 1 billion errors. But the DNA code for mankind is only about 3 billion base codes in size. So the DNA code of mankind should have been rendered useless. A similar calculation will lead to the conclusion that almost all, if not all, species have useless DNA codes.

I see. Your conclusion here results from your previous misdefinitions of 'mutations as errors' and 'natural selection as irrelevant'. In fact, given a static environment, each mutation which survives to the next generation is either useful or makes no difference to the survivability of the individual therefore over time these useful or irrelevant changes accumulate and can be tracked to demonstrate lineage.

Please note that the above calculation only went back 500 million years, but evolutionists claim that life goes back even further than that. So the codes should be even more corrupted than the above calculation shows.

Not 'corrupted', just 'different'. You continually misdefine & misrepresent.

So it is impossible that the species of the earth have originated that long ago. But then the dating of the fossils from 100 million years ago and further back must be incorrect. Also the fossils are not dated directly, but indirectly by the dating of the rock layers. So the dating of the rock layers must be incorrect.

So the entire interpretation of the fossil record has been overthrown. So has the entire interpretation of the rock layers. So there is no way to use the rock layers or the fossil record to establish any descendent relationship among of any species. So there is no theory of evolution that stands.

Yet another erroneous conclusion based on flawed premises.


So overall, you've shown that you have no understanding of the terms you're using or of the mechanism which is the centre-piece of your position.

Mutations are errors.

Just goggle mutation errors. Look at all the prominent sites that say mutation are errors.

Your entire post is incorrect.

---

Not to mention that only about 2% of the DNA is coding, so most mutations happens to the dormant 98% of the DNA..

The corruption rate would still be the same in the coding part.
So the calculation still holds.