Human mutational decay rate. In his book, Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, Dr. JC Sanford lays out a case that the mutational load on our genes is so high that the human genome could not have existed for as long as evolutionists say. Our genes are subject to entropy and are passed on from generation to generation, so based on the measurable mutation rate, the conclusion is that humans (and other species) could not have existed for as long as evolutionists tell us. The idea is that information destroying mutations so far outnumber the information-gaining mutations (which, according to calculations (since one has never been discovered) cannot be selected for) create such a burden on the overall genetic code that genes cannot handle the mutational load over time.
My favorite word picture from the book is: believing that random mutations and natural selection are responsible for the entire “tree of life” from bacteria to mankind is like believing that you could take the assembly instructions for a tricycle and through photocopying errors and quality control measures, arrive at the instructions for assembling a starship complete with hyperdrive and holodeck if given enough time. That word picture accurately describes the evolutionary model.
- Simple DNA -> Tricycle Assembly Instructions
- DNA replication -> Photo-copier machine
- Random Mutations -> Copies of copies through time are slightly different than original
- Natural Selection -> As tricycles are assembled with the latest copies of the instructions, the tricycles that sell better, have their instructions reused for copying (You can easily see that copying mistakes in assembly instructions will have little to do with the purchasing of tricycles. Mutations cannot generate enough differences in the assembly instructions to warrant fitness gaps.)
- Add deep time to the equation, so that random mutations have changed the assembly instructions into forming new and exciting features like wings, lungs, bones, white blood cells… -> Over time the photo-copying of the tricycle instructions yields new instructions like adding additional wheels/axles and changing the peddles to internal combustion engines…
What we see instead is that the copying mistakes begin to wreck the organism. Over time, these random mutations accumulate and lead to extinction. This is observable science. The evolutionary myth is the exact opposite of observable science.
Evolutionary biology is caught in a catch-22 when it comes to the idea that mutations produce new features.
This is a bit complex — let’s go over it again. Darwinian evolution either (1) produces nothing new, or (2) it’s destined to produce boatloads of deadly junk. In the case of (2), the reward for trying new things is high compared to the cost of building new structures. But in order for the ratio to be high enough for complexity to increase, the cost of building new things must be negligible. Novelties proliferate, but the fraction of the beast that’s vestigial grows, and the organism is eventually swamped and overwhelmed by harmful vestigial features. However, if you try to avoid the problem of (2) by making the reward-to-cost ratio lower, as in (1), then nothing new ever evolves.