[Right Wing Professor]

After debating with evolutionists, you quickly realize that they have no interest whatsoever in the ratio of harmful to beneficial mutations or the "sharpness" of the natural selection "filter." In fact, they consistently demonstrate that they don't even understand the problem. They are clueless about the mathematics involved.

This from someone who thinks that you can infer something about point mutations in a living system from single bit errors in Linux!

Humans are an unusually genetically homogeneous species. Nonetheless, there are single nucleotide polymorphisms every 100 - 300 bases along a 3 billion base genome. So what would happen if you applied this mutation rate to the Linux kernel?

[RussP]

"Humans are an unusually genetically homogeneous species. Nonetheless, there are single nucleotide polymorphisms every 100 - 300 bases along a 3 billion base genome. So what would happen if you applied this mutation rate to the Linux kernel?"

I'm sorry, but getting a point across to you is extremely difficult. The point was not that Linux can withstand a higher or lower mutation rate than human genes. The point was that, if a defect or mutation occurs at random, the chances of a harmful effect are much greater than the chances of a beneficial effect (and neutral effects are essentially irrelevant by definition).

Let me ask you the question that I have never had answered by an evolutionist. What is the approximate ratio of harmful to beneficial mutations in nature? I will be impressed by either a general estimate or a specific estimate for any species at any time, anywhere. Just give me a frickin' ballpark number, and tell me where it is documented. Is it closer to 10:1, 1000:1, or 1,000,000:1? Thanks.

[b_sharp]

Living organisms also have a 1 in 3 likelihood of having a point mutation not effectively change a codon at all.