The inability of Darwinism to account for new DNA information is a fundamental proof against the theory.
Positive mutations happen, but rarely. The evidence is over whelming that the process of random mutations and natural selection cannot generate the genetic information needed to explain the irreducible complexity of life.
A positive mutation according to neo-Darwinism is the first step in creating proteins needed to create new molecular machines needed to create new cellular systems needed to create new cells needed to create new tissues needed to create new organs needed to create new body plans for new species.
ONE mutation alone does not produce “new information” … just as introducing one new letter into a sentence does not change the meaning of sentence. Virtually all random mutations are negative and destroy existing DNA information … just as one random change of a letter in a sentence will probably degrade the meaning of that sentence.
The question of HOW MANY mutations it would take by neo Darwinian processes to evolve one enzyme into another functional enzyme is at least seven, according to experiments performed on bacterial proteins. The waiting time for 7 coordinated mutations to arise in a bacterial population is on the order of 10 to the 27th power years. The universe itself is only 10 to the 10th power years old. (“The Evolutionary Accessibility of New Enzyme Functions: A Case Study from the Biotin Pathway,” BIO-Complexity, 2011 (1): 1-17)
All life forms are capable of limited change based on existing DNA. Better diets of immigrants coming to America will lead to taller statures after a few generations. But changes in body forms as supposed by neo-Darwinism requires new DNA information altogether.
Charles Darwin himself said: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down” Over 800 Ph.D. scientists connected to biology have signed a statement agreeing they “are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life” and urge careful examination of all the evidence for Darwinian evolution.
But such evidence, much of which is contradictory, is not examined in schools and universities for the simple reason that new DNA information cannot arise by a Darwinian process … except in minds of those driven by extreme “expectation of confirmation” and not a willingness to consider the evidence where it leads.
(Condensed from: “Problem 3: Step-by-Step Random Mutations Cannot Generate the Genetic Information Needed for Irreducible Complexity” … evolutionnews.org Please visit this site for much more information)