Per point one (a fundamental misunderstanding of the subject) and inherent laziness in the gamma… Two recent studies… 50,000 to 100,000 fatal mutations for every beneficial one (UNC)
75.9% harmful vs. 1.3% beneficial mutations (UMich)
Both studies are readily available with only a cursory search (you have to be lazy to miss them), and both make Darwinian evolution a non-starter
Per point one (a fundamental misunderstanding of the subject) and inherent laziness in the gamma… Two recent studies… 50,000 to 100,000 fatal mutations for every beneficial one (UNC)
75.9% harmful vs. 1.3% beneficial mutations (UMich)
Both studies are readily available with only a cursory search (you have to be lazy to miss them), and both make Darwinian evolution a non-starter
I knew that the majority of random mutations were harmful, but I did not appreciate how bad that ratio really is. "Evolution" plays Russian Roulette with 4 out of 6 chambers loaded.
Per point one (a fundamental misunderstanding of the subject) and inherent laziness in the gamma… Two recent studies… 50,000 to 100,000 fatal mutations for every beneficial one (UNC)
75.9% harmful vs. 1.3% beneficial mutations (UMich)
Both studies are readily available with only a cursory search (you have to be lazy to miss them), and both make Darwinian evolution a non-starter
I knew that the majority of random mutations were harmful, but I did not appreciate how bad that ratio really is. "Evolution" plays Russian Roulette with 4 out of 6 chambers loaded.
Yes, and then pulling the trigger 1600 times in a row