Either mutation is not sufficient to accomplish a 2% genetic and 6% genomic change over six to seven million years; thus there would be much LESS than a 2% and 6% change in DNA over several million years.
OR.....
Mutation is so robust that over six to seven million years there would be much MORE than a 2% and 6% change in DNA, so much mutation in fact that no species could even SURVIVE that level of mutation.
Do you have any evidence of a species going extinct due to high mutation rates?
Bacteria have a gene for an “error prone” DNA polymerase that they turn on when the bacteria is undergoing stress. This deliberate increase in their mutation rate is an adaptive mechanism. Now why do you suppose a bacteria would intentionally increase its mutation rate while undergoing stress?
Do you have any evidence of a species becoming improved due to mutations? Or do we only observe species becoming weaker due to mutation?
And yes we do see entire herds being wiped out due to a mutation.
Fortunately, the entire species doesn't get wiped out because the gene pool is very large.
Many species have gone extinct over the centuries it is claimed. Can you prove mutation DIDN'T wipe them out?
Not offhand. I don't think we've reached that point in general yet, because the earth is not nearly as old as evolutionism requires. In the few thousand years of life history we've not accumulated a large enough genetic load to make the genetic entropy problem critical, though the burden is constantly increasing. From reading between the lines, I think some of the old-earth reviewers of Sanford's work are awakening to the age-of-the-earth implications of genetic entropy. Life clearly cannot be millions of years old with observed mutation rates.
Bacteria have a gene for an “error prone” DNA polymerase that they turn on when the bacteria is undergoing stress. This deliberate increase in their mutation rate is an adaptive mechanism. Now why do you suppose a bacteria would intentionally increase its mutation rate while undergoing stress?
Mutation hotspots are a special case. There are specialized adaptation mechanisms (such as in the immune system) that cause rapid iterative mutations, either constantly or under environmental stress. The mutations occur within a constrained region of the genome so as not to wreak havoc on the genome generally. Within the constrained region the mutations can cause rapid variation in a pseudo-neutral manner, such as in the ongoing competition between disease pathogens and the immune system, or among starving bacteria seeking a new source of nutrients.
This is a bit like discovering a self-replicating combination lock that has a mechanism in it that causes the correct combination to change over time as the lock reproduces. If the mechanism affected the whole lock it would tend to wreck the overall function of the lock in short order, but so long as it only affects the working combination, any set of numbers is as good as another. Overall, though, the lock is more complex than a similar lock lacking such a variation mechanism, and thus the ultimate competence for the creator of the lock is greater, not less.