are mutations really random?

1. 80

   lovetherainposted 5 years ago

   This is what darwinists claim, yet it is obvious that organisms get what they need to survive. The nylon-eating bacteria just HAPPENS to develop enzymes to digest nylon by products. How likely was that to be random?

   replyreport
   1. 94

      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      No, it is not random.  Consider the likelihood of a mutation of a colony of bacteria living in Uranium ore vs that of a group in clay.
      
      But your example is a false one.  It is quite probable that the mutation was always there, but unused.  When nylon by products come available those few with the mutation survive and it becomes survival of the fittest, with the "fittest" being those with the mutation.  Or perhaps it's a very common mutation (perhaps from mismatched genetic transfer), but bacteria dies...until the by products are available. 
      
      What is obvious is not that organisms get what they need to survive (specific food, light, etc.) but that they change to match what is there; that they need what is available.

      replyreport
   2. 65

      Jessie L Watsonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Gene's and biology is relatively constant. The most random element of evolution is the environment. And then you have something like how we've grown our world population by 83 million between 2017-2018. This brings in new variations of DNA and the potential for new mutations as well. Eventually, this affects the environment but the environment and technology seems to be how we've been able to reproduce at such an unprecedented rate (and live longer). It's not always clear where one ends and the other begins. It's a strange dance between nature and nurture, really.
      
      People have argued for 30 years about whether or not evolution has been a slowly ascending incremental process or a static process punctuated by rapid changes in the environment. I would wager its a bit of both and seeing as though we can't predict these things exactly, you might be able to call it random under certain contexts.

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      There is so much of dna we currently do not understand, you could be right. Parts of it, in much of nature, could be lying dormant;waiting for a 'need' to morph into a particular subset of abilities, within the environment. A need that a particular species, determined by its function, could most effectively address.
      
      That, assuming one (even loosely) believes the Gaia theory could be based on fact. That the entire earth has a symbiotic relationship whose main function is to ensure life prevails under all circumstances.

      replyreport