How do people who claim no positive mutations exist explain the existence of positive mutations?

Question

Posted a few minutes ago:

"no positive mutations have been found so far."

Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).

A few sources:


Boyden, Ann M., Junhao Mao, Joseph Belsky, Lyle Mitzner, Anita Farhi, Mary A. Mitnick, Dianqing Wu, Karl Insogna, and Richard P. Lifton. 2002. High bone density due to a mutation in LDL-receptor-related protein 5. New England Journal of Medicine 346: 1513-1521, May 16, 2002. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/346/20/1513
Dean, M. et al. 1996. Genetic restriction of HIV-1 infection and progression to AIDS by a deletion allele of the CKR5 structural gene. Science 273: 1856-1862.
Elena, S. F., V. S. Cooper and R. E. Lenski. 1996. Punctuated evolution caused by selection of rare beneficial mutations. Science 272: 1802-1804.
FAO/IAEA. 1977. Manual on Mutation Breeding, 2nd ed. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
Long, Patricia. 1994. A town with a golden gene. Health 8(1) (Jan/Feb.): 60-66.
Moffat, Anne S. 2000. Transposons help sculpt a dynamic genome. Science 289: 1455-1457.
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books.
Nachman, M. W. and S. L. Crowell. 2000. Estimate of the mutation rate per nucleotide in humans. Genetics 156(1): 297-304.
Newcomb, R. D. et al. 1997. A single amino acid substitution converts a carboxylesterase to an organophosporus hydrolase and confers insecticide resistance on a blowfly. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 94: 7464-7468.
Oliver, Antonio et al. 2000. High frequency of hypermutable Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis lung infection. Science 288: 1251-1253. See also: Rainey, P. B. and R. Moxon, 2000. When being hyper keeps you fit. Science 288: 1186-1187. See also: LeClerc, J. E. and T. A. Cebula, 2000. Pseudomonas survival strategies in cystic fibrosis (letter), 2000. Science 289: 391-392.

If you claim positive mutations don't exist, how do you explain their existence?

Answer 1

I bet most of you look at all the sources and are so impressed that you assume it must be supporting his claim.



Well in my experience when ever dreamstuff entity asks a question and gets an answer he just ignores it which suggests he isn't really looking for the truth but rather wants to convince others what he believes. So I wasn’t surprised when clicked on the only linked source to find that it doesn’t support his claim at all.



To be fair to dreamstuff I don’t think he was being dishonest with this link because the points are a little subtle.



So let’s look at the link.



http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJ…

(read the conclusion)



The paper is talking about a disease called Osteoporosis. This disease causes low bone density. i.e. weaker bones. The paper is not talking about the cause or a cure for the disease, but rather its saying that there is a Wnt pathway that causes higher bone density, there is also a “normal antagonist” to this Wnt pathway that in healthy people does not cause any problems. The mutation impairs this “normal antagonist”, which allows the Wnt pathway to increase which allows bone density to increase.



The disease hasn’t been cured. All the mutation did was get rid of the symptom of the disease, by making some of the DNA code non functional.



This is the equivalent to the flowing scenario.



Imagine someone has an arm that is infected and the infection is about to kill him. The next day he goes to war and his arm gets shot off. He goes to the doctor and the doctor says that his infection is gone.



Now you could argue that getting your body parts blown off increases health. But it is very clear that the arm was not even cured, it was merely blown off. The same is true for that piece of DNA code.



This is why when we say ‘positive mutation’ we mean a mutation that is part of a string of DNA code that actually functions. i.e. if a mutation decrease information it can not be called a ‘positive mutation’

Answer 2

Because it is true. Beneficial mutations are required for evolution so evolutionists must say it is a fact that they happen although it is not observed and in reality only neutral and harmful mutations are observed.

Answer 3

There's no evidence for atoms









See how easy it was to say something like that?











Calling creationists morons would be an insult to morons

Answer 4

Because they have to outright lie to argue science as they have no reason or logic to back them up.

Answer 5

My question is, if mutations are so beneficial why don't we all get as much radiation exposure as possible ? Why avoid X-rays or Chernobyl or Fukushima ?



If they will ultimately result in higher evolved species, why not save time and speed up the process with modern technology ?



The truth is that mutations are harmful and often lethal.



Yet, this is considered valid science, by some, explaining how life originated.

Answer 6

Yes you are right.

God is an illusion.

Answer 7

Generally they lie about it.

Answer 8

let me guess... Talk Origins.