"A new gene mutation can cause an alteration only to a characteristic which the organism had had in previous generations. It could not produce a lobster's claw on a cat; it could only alter the cat in some way, still leaving it essentially a cat."^440/197

What does this prove? It proves that diversification of life did not come about through mutational evolution. It also proves that diversification of life within a species does not prove evolution; it proves that diversification within a species is possible but not outside the species and that this diversification did not come about through mutations, but was always present within the DNA of the species to start with. The issue is not whether variations can be achieved within a species but whether a species can mutate into a new and completely different species. This has never been proved in any experiment on any level.

According to scientists, the minimum number of mutations necessary to bring about the simplest new structure in an organism is five.^332/67-68 However, these five mutations must be of the right kind and must be functionally related. This means that not just any five mutations will do the job. The odds of five mutations taking place functionally related at the same time in a single organism by chance are astronomically impossible. Scientists believe only one mutation takes place in every 100,000 gene replications.^338/272 The probability of five non-harmful mutations taking place functionally related in a single cell is 1 in 10⁴⁰.^355/5 If one hundred trillion, 10¹⁴, bacteria were produced every second for five billion years, 10¹⁷ seconds, the resulting population would be only 1/1,000,000,000 of what was needed.

This is just the first step. Next, these five mutations must somehow be brought together to be integrated and function in concert with each other. Next, this integrated function must provide some advantage or be scattered within the population due to interbreeding.^333/1/87 With these odds, it is not possible to explain through these means how complex life forms came into being given any amount of time. For example: the wing of the fruit fly alone involves 30-40 genes. This means that given the age of the universe, as evolutionists define it, through random selection you might produce one wing of a fruit fly. That is trillions of years away from a fully formed fruit fly let alone an animal or human. Evolution is not the answer about how we got here. As a result Gertrude Himmelfarb in her book Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution (1959) concluded:

"It is now discovered that favorable mutations are not only small but exceedingly rare, and the fortuitous combination of favorable mutations such as would be required for the production of even a fruit fly, let alone a man, is so much rarer still that the odds against it would be expressed by a number containing as many nots as there are letters in the average novel, ‘a number greater than that of all the electrons and protons in the visible universe’—an improbability as great as that a monkey provided with a typewriter would by chance peck out the works of Shakespeare."^440/196

What other evidences do we have against biological evolution? No one in the history of man has ever witnessed any life form forming new organs and then passing this on to the next generation. There is no observational evidence of transitions from one life form to another anywhere. All life forms are complete within their own kind.^336/67-68

Then there are cases like the Bombardier Beetle. The Bombardier Beetle has two glands which produce a liquid which is stored in two storage chambers. When this beetle wishes some of the liquid is transferred to two combustion chambers. When this beetle feels threatened he produces an audible explosion which ejects a noxious foul-smelling fluid at the temperature of boiling water. It aims this discharge with remarkable accuracy and quickly. He is able to do this twenty times or more before exhausting his supply which can then be replenished within twenty-four hours.

This liquid in the Bombardier Beetle contains 10% hydroquinones and 23% hydrogen peroxide. When these two liquids are combined in a laboratory there is an immediate explosion. How does this beetle keep from exploding before discharging this liquid? Through an inhibitor present in the liquid. When he is ready to discharge the liquid for protection, he immediately releases an anti-inhibitor as it leaves the body and the explosion occurs warning off its enemies. How complicated is this process. Modern science is not able to duplicate either the inhibitor or the anti-inhibitor.

What is the problem with this scenario? Like so many things in nature, this beetle could not exist as it does unless all these components were in place all at once at the same time. If these different traits had evolved, the beetle would have blown himself up to extinction before random mutations produced the inhibitor. The process of the Bombardier Beetle cannot be explained through mutational evolution or any other kind of evolution.

An evolutionary scientist in a February, 1985 issue of Time magazine brought out the point that humans have acid in their stomachs and that if the stomach did not have a mucus lining that the acid would eat through their stomachs and humans would be extinct. His point being that the Bombardier Beetle was not an argument against evolution. How so? The point is that man’s digestive system also could not exist unless all components had been put in place all at once for the same reason the Bombardier Beetle could not exist as it does. This is not an argument against creation but a further support of what we are saying. When one considers the complexity of living organisms, there is no scientific way to explain how they could possibly have evolved into existence. They had to be created all at once as a total functioning organism.

Another example is the metamorphous of a butterfly. The development of the caterpillar’s hard casing and the dissolution of its organs while in that state could not have been passed on to offspring unless the capacity for metamorphosis was also present.^336/71 A bird’s wing is amazingly complex. His wing, even if it could have evolved by chance would be of no value to the bird if not accompanied with related nerves, muscles and skeleton.^349/98

What do known mutations indicate? First, that the human mutation problem is bad and getting worse. Second, that with this increasing bad results of mutation there is not one good off setting beneficial mutation known in existence. Mutations maim, cripple and sometimes kill. Gene therapy masks the effects of these genetic defects, but they do not reverse the underlying degenerative process. This slow ongoing mutation rate in the human gnome will eventually turn the human genetic code into meaningless gobbledygook.

What do mutations indicate about the Book of Genesis? Mutations indicate that what Moses recorded in Genesis is true: that in the beginning when God created Adam and Eve using DNA as the basis for maintaining the bodies that He gave them, that the information in DNA was perfect and complete to start with. It also proves that when Adam and Eve sinned and God cursed the ground and man, that man came into bondage to corruption evidenced by documented destructive mutations. It is evidence of that curse because no new beneficial information is being added to our DNA, only destructive results through mutations. They indicate that man’s physical body as well as his soul are corrupted and in the process of corruption needing God’s redemption. This is exactly God’s promise to those who turn to His Son’s death and shed blood on the cross for redemption: in the resurrection of the righteous a new uncorrupted body and a redemption of the ecosystem as well for the new uncorrupted body to thrive in without corruption.

"Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood is not able to inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit the incorruptible. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we shall not all sleep [die], but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruptibility, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this corruptible will have put on the incorruptible, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, ‘Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?’ The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Corinthians 15:50-57)

"For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. (Romans 8:18-23)