Does Random Mutation add to the Genome?

The human body has 42 chromosomes arranged into 23 pairs.

Wheat has 42 chromosomes, arranged into 23 pairs.  Sugar cane has 80 chromosomes, arranged into 40 pairs.  However, the question is, can random mutation and random selection add information to the genome?

This is a question that requires experimentation.  But are we allowed to experiment?  Can we even ask the question first that invites experimentation?  Neo-Evolutionists say that over time, through natural selection of random mutations, we changed ourselves from primordial soup into this -- a living human being.  But the question is the same: can it be proved through experiments that the genome can be added upon by random mutation?

Experiments on evolution must be done in order to prove it.  The Fossil record isn't enough, or the theory isn't theory.  The Scientific Method is a tried and true way of proving any hypothesis as theory.   I would like to challenge any serious Scientist to apply the scientific method into evolving a species into another species by random selection.

The genome of the species to be evolved must be counted: chromosomes must be counted in pairs and then the species must be selected for random mutation.  Careful observations must be made as to whether or not the number of chromosomes has changed.  will the species chosen advance to a higher order of life without the invervention of man?

If an experiment can be successfully done, then Evolution can be proved as a Theory and that random mutation can add to the Chromosome count of a species and change it to a higher order of life. :)  Perhaps its time to work on a new wild grain to make it domestic.  Again. 

The Creationism vs. Evolution Debate

Having recently watched a show on the Intelligent Design theory and the various Creationist and Evolution videos I have come to the conclusion that it's a never ending fight. This is because the entire fight is faith based.  It's a fight between Religions, that's all it is, it will never be solved and it will never come to a conclusion.

Meanwhile, Science suffers because of this debate.  Science is caught in the middle since both groups invoke science in order to lend credibility to their argument.  Fortunately, though, both theories exists so those who really knows the truth will turn and Ask Higher Intelligence what actually happened and how life arose on this planet.  The results, however, are surprising.

So, what do you do when you caught between the two?  Let them fight it out and seek out your own answers, its all you can do.  Oh, the Evolutionists will say that they co-opted Logic, the Scientific Method, and the History of Science.  But making such a pronouncement is nothing more than the latest salvo in the debate.  It really create fools to make such a proclamation.  Such a statement is non-sense because it divides the scientific community: it was made in such a way that it creates a "Either you are for Science" or "You are against science" attitude.  However, such a thing is foolish since the Scientific Method and Logic is pretty much owned by all.

So, really, this is getting pathetic.  You guys -- both Creationists and Darwinists -- are really going to have to learn to get along with each other so that the two theories can co-exist peacefully and people can choose for themselves which theory feels right for them.  This will advance science and not make it out to be a big joke.   But since you are at each others intellectual throats, you are making a mockery of Science.  Really, I wonder why the men in the white coats aren't carting both groups off to the Funny Farm.


The Implications of Both Theories

Evolutionists are so bent on taking Intelligence out of the equation of Life to prove that Intelligence had nothing to do with Life on Earth that they are going to have to prove that there is no Intelligence in the Universe in order to prove that their theory is valid.

Creationists will be setting Science back two hundred years since they firmly say that the World was created in six days.  However, here is a newsflash for Creationists and Evolutionists.

--- The Account of Genesis was a human witnessed event.  The Account of Genesis is the end of the Golden Age, the Age of Perfect Virtue and the Beginning of our World as we know it.  It also accounts for a Spiritual Creation.  David Talbott presents this in his thesis "Remembering the End of the World."





--- Evolutionists, you have to pretty much disprove Quantum Physics and Quantum Events and two laws governing Intelligence in the Universe:  The Law of Attraction and the Law of the Harvest.  This means that you have to disprove the infamous double slit experiment.




Since, however, both groups will not do the science and are clinging to theories that are over one hundred years old, you are both making Science a mockery to the World at large.   Like I said, this is an argument of faith.  After all, it takes faith to believe in both theories.  I think Doctor Frankenstein has put it best when dealing with the two groups.

Evolution and Creation

From what I understand, Evolution truly doesn't violate the Judeo-Christian Account of the Creation. 
So, why are Christians fighting over this?  And why can't an Evolutionist reconcile with those that believe in Intelligent Design?  I figure all three accounts can be reconciled quite easily if everyone were to pursue truth.  Intelligent Designers that the position that engineering was used in the creation of the cell and  -- the body.  Evolutionists say that these things happened by accident.  Creationists hold that Creation was done by God and that is that.

The problems with Evolution are these:
1. Evolution happened by Chance.
2. There was an exegenesis of some kind.
3. So far, a living cell is beyond what Science can replicate.  So far!  If Science can actually replicate the cell, there goes the present Exegenesis theory of how Life began.  Remember, the official line is that by a mysterious process the chemicals needed to jump start life were combined in the right way.
4. There are things that evolution can not properly explain: like the evolution of the eye.

The problem with Intelligent Design are these:
1. ID scientists ignore Evolution in the fossil record (there's enough for a clear progression).
2. It's just science mixed with religion, and evolutionists will call you on it even if you apply principles of engineering in describing how a cell works.

The problem with Creationism is this:
 1. The story of Adam and Eve is an Allegory painted about our lives.  The garden of eden and the Lone Dreary Wilderness are symbols God is trying to convey to us about life.

2. What actually happened isn't recounted in the Scriptures at all.  So both Intelligent Design and Evolution are not discounted.  (Although God promised that each order of Life came forth after their own Kind in the Books of Moshe (Moses) and Abraham.  Meaning that the Elohim even followed the rules of Mendeleev's laws of Genetics.)

So, how are we going to reconcile all of these three beliefs, theories, and accounts?  Simple.  We need honest scientists who are willing to seek the Absolute Truth.  There must be open dialogue from all three groups, to learn and to seek the Absolute Truth that will reconcile all three truths together.

All three groups have something positive to bring to the table that satisfies the account of Abraham.  I can see four possibilities:

1. Evolution can be a mechanism that can be guided and directed.
2. Engineering principles can be recognized from the study of DNA and how the cell operates, and how every organ in the body operate.  From the brain to the liver to the eye, to the muscular skeleton system there is STRONG evidence that the body is a well designed machine.
3. The recognition that Adam and Eve may have not been among those that have evolved from apes.  But also the Mitochondrial Eve is a possibility.
4. Science jump starting Life in the Laboratory will give more evidence that the Elohim had a hand in Creating life on this planet.

Remember, truth will prevail and in time Evolution, Intelligent Design, and Creation will be reconciled into one theory of Genesis for the Earth by scientists willing to investigate the truth.  Darwin, Creationism, and Intelligent Design are only puzzle pieces in a much larger picture.

By the way, Ben Stein isn't a fucking liar.  He was just reporting on how a competing scientific theory against Evolution, Intelligent Design, is not being given any attention in schools or in Universities.  And even now, Intelligent Design is being refined as Engineers are adding their point of view in the Genesis of the Earth.  It's time to stop the infighting among the scientific community and to seek the truth on such matters.