Mutations in the Genome

For the next few weeks, I’m going to move fossils to Friday, and do a series on mutations and their implications every Monday.



Mutations are often espoused as proof of evolution, despite recent geneticists insistence otherwise. When we hear mutation we often think of superhuman powers or evolving into a better form of humanity. This is genuinely one of the times where I wish evolutionists had been correct. The studies over the past decade reveal a grim reality, so before and after you read this blog might I suggest some adorable puppy videos? It’s medicine for the soul.


To understand this fully, we need to have a basic understanding of what a mutation is. To know that, we need to understand what it is that’s being mutated. fullsizeoutput_148f

What is being mutated? Our DNA coding. DNA has four chemical letters that code our genetics. There are 3 billion letters in the human genome! We also have around 100 trillion cells in our bodies at any given time. For each cell divided the code inside that cell creates 2-3 new mutations. DNA is spectacular, and comes equipped with its own editor! However, our DNA editor doesn’t work fast enough to correct the massive amounts of coding mistakes we call mutations.

Until the early 2000’s most of our genome, around 90%, was considered by the scientists to be “junk”.


There are still gaps in the coding that needs to be worked out, as our DNA has proved to be the greatest example of information compression we’ve ever found. However, we now know that the entire genome has function and purpose.

This knowledge has led to more studies on mutations, which has shown evolution can no longer hang on natural selection and mutations. For evolution to work, mutations would have to take a simple creature and make it more complex. The opposite, rather, is what scientists have found in mutations of the genome. This is what we would expect if we followed scientific laws of thermodynamics. Our genome is not improving, it’s tending towards entropy.

Mutations cause us to age, and eventually to decay. What’s the good news, besides the ample amount of puppy videos available? Death has been defeated, friends!



So what are mutations? We’ll get into the specifics of that next Monday so stay tuned.



Author: lnhereford

I am a Christian, wife, mother, podcaster and homeschooler currently traveling the United States with my loving husband and darling daughter!

6 thoughts on “Mutations in the Genome”

  1. When I hear “mutation”, I think MRSA. You seriously insult the intelligence of your audience when you imply that they know so little about science that they think the X-Men are possible. You then misrepresent the scientific community by implying that this idea is taken seriously by any reputable evolutionary biologist. IT IS NOT!

    Your premise is based entirely on humans being the ideal form. This is not the case. Humans are merely the byproduct of millions of years of breeding.

    How does a single celled organism become a multicelled organism? By having a random mutation that “degrades” the organism (degraded because it no longer is representative of the population) into something that has more than one cell.

    There is no better or worse in evolutionary biology (so long as the affect does not impede on an organism’s ability to reproduce (I.e. it’s fitness)). There is just different and whether the difference *improves* that fitness.

    Imagine the first Clown Fish with the mutation to be able to withstand the poisonous tentacles of the anemones. He (or she) would have been the X-Men of the clown fish world, the awe inspiring one! The one that had the best ability to survive and multiply and thus pass on that mutation to future generations. Later generations born without the gene would be more likely to be eaten (or killed by the anemones when following their buddies? I don’t know, but its possible) and thus less likely to pass on their non-mutated genes. At that point, the mutation becomes the norm, while the original is abnormal. And, many, many, many generations later, if a clown fish is born without the gene that protects them, which is possible, we think that they are “born wrong”, but they are merely expressing genes from the long ago past.

    Look up babies born with vestigial tales. Or people with extra nipples. And of course, hairy backs. These are merely expressions of genes from our distant past.


    1. I meant to disrespect to my readers at all, most Christians have been taught that science is the enemy and are not informed about how mutations prove we are not evolving, our genome is going down not up.

      I think your being misleading by suggesting evolution doesn’t mean getting better. The entire point of evolution is that we started out as a pond of goo and got better and better. Even natural selection, which was actually something coined by creationists, suggests the fittest survives. When it comes to mutations, however, as I plan to map out next Monday and the next after that, the change is so minuscule that natural selection our ‘mother nature’ wouldn’t be able to see it. It’s happening at slightly above the atomic level. Is mutations have consistently recked havoc as they are today it’s simply not possible for evolution to have happened. You can not get a heart, brain, or any new information from the destruction or confusion of previous information. Human geneticists know this, they’ve been trying to figure out how to work evolution in to mutations for a decade now and have admitted it hurts the theory not helps.

      The idea of vestigial tail being evidence of evolution has been disproven for a long time. Most ‘tails’ are not true tails. Any honest scientist admits that these tails are not possibly expressions of genes from our past. They are usually the expression of a disease, or mutation. Often they need to be removed or the person with the ‘tail’ will suffer. Also, they are ordinarily not expressed in the region where tails should be. Some have appeared in shoulders and backs. These are results of mutations, not past gene expression. Scientists can see now that they are not old information resurfacing, but are in fact mutated genes. Here are a few links to further explain this.

      There’s so much new information that has come out about mutations and the Genome over the past decade. I can understand why it has taken evolutionists time to realize these old arguments don’t stand in the face of the new evidence. However, it is still important to point out that with mutations at their current rate humans would never have lasted millions of years, nor could they have randomly come from rocks. The geneticists have found such staggering calculations as to make aliens a much likelier story line. It simply takes too much faith to believe evolution, the last leg it had to stand on was natural selection of mutations in the hopes that 90% of the Genome was junk. That’s all been disproven now alone with the Big Bang Theory. There are no more biological explanations for how we could possibly have evolved from rocks.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: