Terry Read
I am not a scientist doing research in the lab or the field. I am not a theologian. I am just a person who reads God’s Word — yes, I said it — God’s Word; and I make observations and connect dots.
I recently came across an article in my email at work: “Veterans, families, caregivers can boost blood supply, get $10 Amazon.com gift card.”1 The article stated that blood donations are needed to treat sickle cell disease. Sickle cell disease is caused by a genetic mutation. If a person gets the genetic mutation from one parent, this has some advantage in an environment that has malaria.2 If a person has the genetic mutation from both parents, the person has sickle cell disease, which is very bad — hence the need for blood donations to treat the disease.
This article represents most articles that I come across referencing genetic mutations. If the writer of the article is not making a case for Darwinian evolution, the genetic mutation or mutations discussed in the article are recognized as bad. It is only when the writer is trying to show evidence for Darwinian evolution that genetic mutations are touted as being good and used as proof of Darwinian evolution — as in the case where one copy of the genetic mutation for the sickle-cell trait may be beneficial in certain circumstances.3
But even then, sickle cell trait — as pointed out by Dr. Carl Williams of the San Antonio Bible Based Science Association — can cause problems, such as when the person with sickle-cell trait is at high altitude.
Under any circumstance, the sickle cell mutation is pretty poor evidence for Darwinian evolution. But Darwinists still use it because they do not have much.
Keep in mind, a genetic mutation is a copying error in the DNA
A genetic mutation that offers an advantage in certain circumstances is not evidence for Darwinian evolution. To show Darwinian evolution can happen, you have to show a real gain in genetic information, so that over time you could go from a “simple” single-celled organism to all of life on this planet, in all of its integrated complexity. All without a designer ever asking the question, Where are we going with this? I again put “simple” in quotes because we have never observed a simple single-celled organism.
I just came across another article titled, “Oregon toddler diagnosed with ‘beyond rare’ gene mutation.”4 The article talks about how they will work on developing a new treatment. Once again, an article that is objective and not trying to make a point for Darwinism reports a genetic mutation as bad.
I have read articles where cancer is basically synonymous with genetic mutations. One came out recently — “How gene mutation boosts cancer risk.” 5 This article is particularly interesting. It implies that getting cancer is the default condition. Our body’s immune system has to fight cancer off. The genetic mutation “disrupts cells’ ability to suppress tumors.” This is just an article on a finding on what causes cancer and learning how to fight it. Again, it is not attempting to make a point for or against Darwinian evolution, therefore they can admit the reality that a genetic mutation is a cause of cancer.
As a matter of fact, I personally know someone who became anemic due to a genetic mutation that they believe was caused by a virus. This individual facetiously referred to herself as a “mutant,” realizing of course that this is a bad thing.
I challenge readers of this article to observe for themselves. If you come across an article that references genetic mutations, see whether the genetic mutations are considered good or bad. I think you will find that they tend to be considered “good” only when the writer is making a case for Darwinism.
I pray that your love will overflow more and more, and that you will keep on growing in knowledge and understanding. Philippians 1:9.
May God increase our knowledge and understanding – and love.
Footnotes:
5. How gene mutation boosts cancer risk — ScienceDaily
