Ofcourse this means recent mutations. How do you explain heriditary diseases like downs syndrome?
“Of course this means recent mutations. How do you explain heriditary diseases like downs syndrome?”
Not exactly. It means at the moment a mutation becomes a step in evolution, if there were such a thing, the mutation must be of germ cells. (I’m not arguing against evolution, only that at the present stage of knowledge, it is not yet a science.)
Since I’m not defending any particular view, I don’t need to “explain hereditary diseases.” Evolutionists always conveniently drop the main issue. It’s not evolution within species, but the “origin of species” that is the issue. Perhaps hereditary diseases are examples of evolution within species, but even so, they would be irrelevant to the question of whether one specie can evolve from another.
By the way. I have no objection to your believing in evolution if you are convinced it is science and true, anymore than I object to those theists that believe in creation, or ID. I think you are all mistaken, but lots of people are mistaken about a lot of things, but so long as their views are not forced on me, they do me no harm. But I have noticed something about most evolutionists I do not understand. Why do most, especially those in academia, become positively apoplectic when someone else doesn’t believe in evolution. What do they care? Perhaps you have some insight into that.
Hank