-Mutation(s).(adjective).mutant.(noun):.is a change in DNA; a gene or organism that has undergone a heritable change, mostly that being of a deprecation in quality. 

The simplest mutation occurs when a single nucleotide.(the building blocks of DNA).in a creature's DNA is switched to a different nucleotide. Mutation rates vary from place to place along the length of a protein or in a nucleic acid.molecule.

What a mutation cannot do is change all the instructions embedded within a cell in one step.(for example: forming a bear {with its different nature, shape, breathing and swimming habits, eating habits, digestive system, etc.} from a whale).

Most mutations aren't heritable beyond one generation and most are harmful. Pathological.aggregation of mutant proteins leads to diseases such as Alzheimer's, sickle cell anemia and prion related diseases. Most mutations provide negative results. 

The ability to perpetuate is encoded in genes. If we are to assume that myriad mutations made possible the highly complex and ordered organisms we see in the plant and animal world, we are being asked to deny the fact that most mutations produce weaker not more 'survival of the fittest' organisms as evolution has assumed.

One of Darwinian's tenets.decimates the other. There just was not enough time for chance and mutation to work out the order we see today.

Evolution is confusion in motion.

-Natural selection:.In evolution, natural selection is one of the mechanisms by which it is alleged evolution has occurred; that it is good at producing change based upon the likelihood.(a synonym for the word 'chance').of reproducing and passing genes onto the next generation. And this due to necessity.occasioned by an environment. It considers that environmental effects affect an organism, either detrimentally or successfully, regarding reproduction of species and that favorable outcomes of reproduction fluctuate in varying degrees, thus improving its adaption to the particular environment. Although natural selection is true, it lacks badly, to say the least, when the concept is hypothecated and applied to new species coming into existence as a result of so-called evolutionary processes. Production of species comes not from natural selection, but from natural law. The natural selection idea has unsolvable issues when it comes to development of living organisms, such as this one.

Darwin had great belief in his invention that he called a discovery, that of natural selection. He called it a discovery because he believed he had hit upon a central truth of the way life works. 

Due to environmental pressures, the process of natural selection is applied to eliminate least stable structures, those less adapted to a given environment. In other words, it was not the design of a system created by God with its built in capability of unfolding, but rather the implication being that the original design by Creator-God lacked; so it was the environment.(the creation obviating the Creator).that was impetus for change. Here, the process of natural selection is misapplied and jumps the track of sanity by those 'scientists' who see beyond the discovery of the latest bone as being the 'hopeful monster' they so desperately need in providing somewhat of a support for the crackpot theory they have adopted. 

Natural selection cannot be imposed.regarding the debut of first life, as natural selection means dissimilar replication.."DNA would not be what it is if natural selection were true."....Paul Davies.

Darwin knew this and was honest about it, unlike others who later deceptively.championed his work. Hijacking his work for their own purposes to produce an agenda based on unfounded assumptions, his work became altered and philosophies.concocted and added to his theory for injection into public 'education' programs. Here were designs to steer others along certain pathways for purposes of control to the advantage of those perpetrating the information they wished to impose. However, the abject stupidity of this is shown by those who today continue being off base in an unending quest for validity of their ideas. In effect, they think they can steer the river. It was all part of the 'divide and conquer' approach to lead nations away from Creator-God.

"The serpent that stings us means to hurt us and rejoice as it does so. The lowest animal can imagine the pain of others. But to imagine the joy of others and to rejoice at it is the highest privilege of the highest animals.".…Nietzsche.

Natural selection, by its very definition, cannot work on non-living chemicals.

Because.everything is.energy, everything is vibration, frequencies of variable energy, a 'natural selection' does occur, one that is far above evolutionary thinking of 'survival of the fittest'.(*). So, sincere evolutionists thought they were heading in the correct direction, but were really on the wrong track and the others, knowing they were on the wrong track towards truth of creation, wanted to drag and intimidate others into their scheme.

Natural selection's original postulate can only promote the successful. Living in slavery is often not a success.

Everything in the physical world is invisibly supported, yet this is above the seeing of those dealing only in the physical and observable world.

Natural selection is the phrase utilized by evolutionists to flow the meaning of intelligent design into an alleged mysterious process, a process called natural selection, a process by which claim is made that individuals of a species with characteristics that help them to become adapted to their specific environment, tend to survive.(survival of the fittest).and transmit their characteristics, while those less adapted, tend to die out, so that in the course of generations there is a progressive tendency.(which somehow according to the 'magical' process of evolution is supposed to occur).in the species to a greater degree of adaption. Understood as acting upon random mutations, natural selection is an unsound process.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics implies disorder in organization over time, therefore living cells could not have evolved from inanimate chemicals and multicellular life could not have evolved from protozoa. 

Fact is, Creator-God designed gene sequences to be consistent throughout different species. Natural selection's answer is that this sequence.somehow.survived change. In other words, things changed around it driven by this mysterious natural selection, but for some reason evolution believes that gene sequences weren't affected by natural selection. That reason being, that it was too important to be altered, implying some intelligence is involved. So, evolution is saying that change occurs to things it deems of lesser importance.

By this reasoning, it also suggests change isn't important. Evolution hides ten miles beyond the wall of scientific facts to avoid accounting for genes that turn other genes either off or on.  It's a confusing concoction of erroneous ideas.

Natural selection becomes arrogant in claiming that just because we cannot account for a structure, does not mean that one does not exist; for example, for years it was thought the appendix was of no use, but now we are learning that it has importance to the immune system. So it is with the intermediaries to AMP.

So it is with medical 'science', which is really not scientific, presenting instead unscientific methods often based on sketchy one-sided research, which bypass consideration of the invisible component of man.

Some surgeons have great skill. Some medical people are adept at fixing broken bones etc. Western medicine has excellent rehabilitave methods. When it comes to illness diagnosis and prescribing pharmaceuticals, it's another story entirely. It's because we have left off.(2Chronicles 16:12).the Creator-God within us, that we look without for other 'fixes'. Instead of scanning our bodies and using intuition in determinations, we adopt often sketchy advice.(*).as faits_accomplis.

And so it is with categorizing the human genome, understanding the brain, etc. Everywhere in nature we see structure of.immense.design, even in the common dandelion and like genes that may be 'turned on' later.
...more on natural selection continues here

-Neanderthal man:.The authors of this report in.Cell, determined that the variation between Neanderthal and modern mtDNA, was four times than that between any two modern humans and there were not any special similarities to modern humans in Europe.

Re: Russia's Caucasus Mountains find:.Matthias Hoss, molecular biologist, an expert in ancient remains, now working at the Swiss Institute for Cancer Research said,."the research appears to support the theory that Neanderthals were an evolutionary dead end."....as reported in.The Calgary Herald.(calgaryherald.com), March 29, 2000.

.