Argument #3: Mutations

[naturestubbs1]

Carl Sagan, stated that evolution was caused by "the slow accumulations of favorable mutations." However, mutations which apparently result in new traits in an organism are due to the corruption of existing information rather than the formation of mutations gaining new information. This reality conflicts against what would be expected for the advancement of evolution.

A mutation cannot "gain new information." A mutation is just a random error and errors cannot gain information. Now if that "error" results in a positive response of an organism to its environment then there is a better chance of that error being passed on. Its a bit more feasable than the notion that a bearded leprechaun sprinkled pre-formed humans (sorry, forgot about the whole rib thing) into a garden like parmesan cheese onto spaghetti.

---

Wrong.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB102.html

/thread

The so called new information that many evolutionists claim that takes place is a result of a corruption of already existing information. The examples you cite fail to achieve a "gain in functioning" mutation. In fact if there were an evolution from molecule to man we should readily see an abundance of this occurrence, we don't.

Honestly??? Have you ever taken biology? You are positing your argument as if it was a new "chicken" that just popped out of an egg with some magical superpower. It is simply the REACTION or lack thereof as a result of a MISTAKE!!! Try some of your wordsmithing on your good book.