Mutations

[axeplayer]

Mutations are defined as breaks or replacements taking place in the DNA molecule, which is found in the nuclei of the cells of a living organism and which contains all its genetic information. These breaks or replacements are the result of external effects such as radiation or chemical action. Every mutation is an "accident," and either damages the nucleotides making up the DNA or changes their locations. Most of the time, they cause so much damage and modification that the cell cannot repair them.

Mutation, which evolutionists frequently hide behind, is not a magic wand that transforms living organisms into a more advanced and perfect form. The direct effect of mutations is harmful. The changes effected by mutations can only be like those experienced by people in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Chernobyl: that is, death, disability, and freaks of nature…

The reason for this is very simple: DNA has a very complex structure, and random effects can only damage it. Biologist B. G. Ranganathan states:

First, genuine mutations are very rare in nature. Secondly, most mutations are harmful since they are random, rather than orderly changes in the structure of genes;any random change in a highy ordered system will be for the worse, not for the better. For example, if an earthquake were to shake a highly ordered structure such as a building, there would be a random change in the framework of the building, which, in all probability, would not be an improvement.

Not surprisingly, no useful mutation has been so far observed. All mutations have proved to be harmful. The evolutionist scientist Warren Weaver comments on the report prepared by the Committee on Genetic Effects of Atomic Radiation, which had been formed to investigate mutations that might have been caused by the nuclear weapons used in the Second World War:

Many will be puzzled about the statement that practically all known mutant genes are harmful. For mutations are a necessary part of the process of evolution. How can a good effect-evolution to higher forms of life-result from mutations practically all of which are harmful?

Every effort put into "generating a useful mutation" has resulted in failure. For decades, evolutionists carried out many experiments to produce mutations in fruit flies, as these insects reproduce very rapidly and so mutations would show up quickly. Generation upon generation of these flies were mutated, yet no useful mutation was ever observed.

[Corvus]

Your S3 is most likely PCI, and does your old computer really have an AGP slot if its that old ? And overclocking it would mean more presure to the system, more likelihood to corruption, and shorter lifespan, with a minimal of improvment. Why would WinAmp boot up automatically? Dos Soundcard Emulator? You mean VDMW? I dont use anything less then Win 2003 server, so i dont know what OS your using 8)

Just briefly, since it doesn't have much to do with the topic...

No, it's not PCI, S3 have been making basic video cards for computers for as long as I can remember, and probably still do - at least for work computers. Does overclocking reduce the lifespan in every instance? Winamp boots up with an agent, and no, I don't mean VDMW. I am using a p900 with Win 98 SE.

I have 4 kidney, and 3 of them are working. As a side note. This is a defect, not an advantage, because my body is not built to handle it.

You honestly expect everyone here to believe that you have 4 kidneys? And since you didn't, you can't use that as an example of a beneficial mutation, since, the kidneys would take up a massive amount of space in the rib cage, so you would more than likely have a reduced heart, liver, lungs, or just have one of them missing.

I wish you would actually investigate these claims instead of dismissing them immediately because they sound like nonsense.

Duplex kidneys, as they are called, happen more often than one might think. It's possible 4 fully working kidneys, with no "reduction of other organs". Duplex kidneys are sometimes associated with other problems, like vesicoureteric reflux. The use of the word "sometimes" in the article suggests that duplex kidneys can function normally without side-effects.

It's not clear whether duplex kidneys would give someone a higher alcohol tolerance, despite what this fairly dubious news source states.

Although this isn't exactly useful, doesn't this go against what your source stated when it said; "All mutations have proved to be harmful"?

I actually said that no mutation has proven to be beneficial.

I'm well aware of what you said. But you don't seem well aware of what your source said back on the first page, which is where I got the thing in quote marks.

As with having an extra toe, this would not be beneficial or harmful to the organism, it would be like a commensalistic relationship between two organisms in a nature sense.

I was pretty clear in stating that the mutation was useless. Read what I wrote again.

[Nyril]

It's not clear whether duplex kidneys would give someone a higher alcohol tolerance, despite what this fairly dubious news source states.

Alchohol tolerance is more a function of the liver then the kidneys.

[LillSnopp]

Alchohol tolerance is more a function of the liver then the kidneys.

I cant handle alcohol whatsoever, but i doubt its related to my kidneys, rather the facts that i never drink


I am still curious about Axeplayer´s stance at this, because he clearly stated that ´the kidneys would take up a massive amount of space in the rib cage, so you would more than likely have a reduced heart, liver, lungs, or just have one of them missing.´, and discarding the fact that of having duplex kidnet, even when i explained it to him it was true, that i do not lie, and the general reality of it, as well as Corvus even gave a name for it (never even cared about that), i now wish to know what he has to say.


And Axeplayer, i also wish for you to think about the fact that you seemed very certain, yet, you where wrong. Could you possible be wrong about other things to? If i was so certain of the fact that Tellus is flat, and then Corvus and otseng showed me that it was not, i think i should go trough most of my ´beliefs´, and re-evaluate them.

[Nyril]

since, the kidneys would take up a massive amount of space in the rib cage, so you would more than likely have a reduced heart, liver, lungs, or just have one of them missing.

It's a good thing you posted this, since it confirms my hypothesis that people can't become fat. For people to become fat, they would need to somehow find a way to keep more inside of them then their unchangable skin volume can hold. Same deal as with the kidneys. No extra room at all possible to get in a chest past the stock model.