The Elements of Evolution (33-2) Random Mutation

Random Mutation

Darwin’s theory – of random variations acted on by natural selection – is not a sufficient mechanism by which evolution might produce the life forms existing today. ~ American biologist Jerry Bergman

A ridiculous fiction bruited by Darwinists about evolution lies in its mechanism: that selection transpires by random mutation. According to this account, an initial error in replication causes a variation which may turn out favorable or unfavorable to survival.

Under the random mutation hypothesis, selection is initially arbitrary: a genetic crap shoot.

For many years in evolution there has been an assumption that mutations occur randomly, and that selection ‘cleans them up’. But genomes have developed mechanisms to avoid mutations in regions that are more valuable than others. ~ Spanish evolutionary biologist Iñigo Martincorena

That evolution is a predictable process, and can occur rapidly, demolishes the notion that randomness has anything to do with evolution. Evolvability – the capacity for adaptive evolution – and convergent evolution confound random mutation as an evolutionary mechanism.

Nonetheless, because randomness is the foundation upon which Darwin’s competitive natural selection was based, there is astonishing volume of literature espousing evolution via random genetic mutation.

Randomness, after all, is always and necessarily related to ignorance. ~ German physicist Jens Eisert et al

Nothing is random. As everything is entangled from the quantum level up, there are always agencies effecting changes, however obscure the initial provocation.

At the heart of the scientific method is the assumption that when something happens there is a cause. ~ American entomologist Richard Gawne

Only religious faith in empiricism blinds researchers to a wealth of evidence. Yet such is the gospel according to Darwinist priests.

Beside pseudo-scientific religiosity, belief in random mutation stems from ignorance about the nuances of genetics and of the influence that microbiomes have on macrobes.

Although random mutations influenced the course of evolution, their influence was mainly by loss, alteration, and refinement. Never did mutation make a wing, a fruit, a woody stem, or a claw appear. Mutations, in summary, tend to induce sickness, death, or deficiencies. No evidence in the vast literature of heredity changes shows unambiguous evidence that random mutation itself, even with geographical isolation of populations, leads to speciation. ~ American evolutionary theorist Lynn Margulis

Bacteria can be frozen for a million years or more and still come back to life. In order to survive that long, there must be some dormancy mechanism, as well as a vitality to life that extra-dimensionally extends beyond physical being.

Further, without an active DNA repair capability, accumulated genetic defects would cause cell death. Even after exposure to ionizing radiation, frozen bacteria can self-repair.

This isn’t a random process. The cells are repairing their DNA. ~ American biologist Brent Christner

Cellular self-repair is a most ancient mechanism. All cells have it to some degree, though descent created trade-offs, such that eukaryotic cells lost some of the vitality that prokaryotes possess for gains in other areas.

Epigenetics regulate genetic expression in myriad ways which are still being discovered. The genome of an organism is replete with coding sequences that offer a tremendous variety of active selection.

Cells constantly make decisions about how best to deploy their genetic databases. If any of this was random, survival itself would be a crapshoot. Clearly it is not.

If instead evolution is vectored by adaptation, however obscure the impetus of the variation, there is no need for Darwinist “natural selection” process. Adaptation is, by definition, a decision from available information.

If genetic evolution is non-random, then a winnowing of the gene pool need not transpire. There is no evidence that such reduction takes place as a evolutionary mechanism.

In contrast, there is abundant evidence that evolution does not result in the die off of antecedent variations, as Darwin conjectured, and as random mutation as an evolutionary force implies. Quite the contrary. Variation to speciation, where several similar species coexist nearby, is abundantly evidenced. Birds, bees, and butterflies are exemplary.

Further, coevolution belies that adaptation is random. Intertwining interspecifics via coevolution simply could not have transpired as it has, innumerable times, if randomness were at the root of evolution.

Is evolution predictable? To a surprising extent the answer is yes. ~ Canadian evolutionary biologist Peter Andolfatto

 Nematode Timing

The nematode Caenorhabditis elegans either goes through its 2-week life cycle or puts itself into suspended animation as a dauer larva, awaiting better conditions, notably sufficient food supply. The roundworm is genetically programmed to take the dauer larva route during overcrowding, which can be sensed by the level of local nematode pheromones.

Facing overcrowding, but with an adequate food supply, nematodes predictably mutate to drop the pheromone sensing that sets them into suspension. Instead, the worms put themselves in the thick of things.


Genetic variation is a cumulative experience. Antecedent genes are conserved. Regressions are common, as the 3-spine stickleback has testified thousands of times, in repeatedly adapting between salt and freshwater living.

Consider the human body: trillions of cells woven into unimaginably intricate complexity. It must maintain itself within strict thermal and physiological limits while enduring an often-unpredictable environment.

To achieve and sustain life, a body must have some robustness and be able to evolve in succeeding generations. The ability to adapt requires sensory capability and the intelligence to make sense of the environment. There is nothing random about that.

The key ingredient to complex life is entanglement. Genes do not act on their own. Instead, they are recipes in a baroque ensemble of interactive operations.

So it is with every bodily function. The only possibility for multicellular life to have evolved is through a networked orchestration. A body is robust only because randomness plays no productive part in its construction or maintenance, nor in its evolution.