According to this theory, most of the genetic variation observed in natural populations are due to an accumulation of "neutral mutations" which do not affect the phenotype of the organism(1). This is a theory that is used to explain genetic variation within a population of organisms. Mutations of this type, although not necessarily destructive by definition, still do nothing to add genetic information required to advance a particular population of an organism to the next "evolutionary" level. If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it.founder effect
The "Founder Effect" is the loss of genetic variation due to isolating a sub-population from a larger population. In doing so, you remove genetic variation from the smaller sup-population. This limiting of genetic variation has no scientific bearing on advancing an organism to the next "evolutionary" level. Again, if you have evidence to the contrarary, please provide it.Discovery of ERV’s
ERVs (Endogenous Retroviruses) while offering some compelling evidence to support the belief that various kinds of organisms share a common ancestor, they still offer no scientific support to advance the ToE. They offer no observable evidence that they in any way provide genetic information to propel an organism in a direction that would elevate it to the next evolutionary plane of existance. Their functions, if any, in the host remain an enigma (2).sequencing of the Genome
Sequencing of the genome also offers no advancement in the ToE. It's evidence that can be used by either Evolutionists, Creationists, or IDers.When one drinks from the wells of ignorance one apparently drinks DEEP.
Really? How do you explain that giant Evo Koolaid mustache that you are sporting?
(1) Plant Systematics: An Interated Approach, By Gurcharan Singh, (C) Science Publishers, 2004
(2) The discovery of endogenous retroviruses, by Robin A Weiss