Disadvantageous Mutations: Figures

Hi,This will be my second post re the Creation-Evolution controversy, in an attempt to resolve the issue in my mind once and for all.This time I have a query on the issue of genetic mutations, their possibilities and implications.Once again (for those on the site who’ve corresponded with me in the past) I am not a scientist (my area being theology) so please understand any misapplied terms, etc.As I understand it, one of the key arguments of the Creationist school runs as follows:1. The vast majority of mutations in evolutionary history are said to be disadvantageous. One debate I watched suggested that 80 to 90 percent were so.2. Consequently, it would be very difficult for life forms to ascend and evolve to more complex life forms with a 90 percent 'failure rate', as it were.Conversely, the evolution argument, as I understand it, runs as follows:1. The percentage of failed mutations is not in fact 90 percent, but a lot lower.2. Moreover, a lot of those mutations are neutral, not negative per se.3. Further to this, although a mutation may be neutral and not immediately benefit the organism in the intended way, an alternate positive use may be found for it.4. Furthermore, as the evolution-mutation process wore on, year after year, DNA learned from its mistakes, and so made fewer mistakes than it did in the earlier stages of the evolution of life. Thus we would expect to find a lower rate of failed mutations now and in recent evolutionary history.I am not going to query the above arguments at this stage, as I suspect they’ve been done to death (although if anyone on either side wishes to add to the above set of points, feel free).Rather, the first question I have in mind runs as follows: if a great many mutations fail (whatever the percentage of disadvantageous mutations, it is still, I presume, rather high, or at least it was at the beginning of evolutionary history), then would we not expect to find a high degree of examples of these failures in the fossil and skeletal records?Simply, then, what is the percentage of fossils and skeletal remains unearthed so far where clear negative, that is, disadvantageous, mutations, are in evidence?Once again, all input welcome.Regards,
Greg

Hi,I must admit, I am a little bereft after reading the more recent posts.
What can I say? I assure you I am not a ‘covert, devious creationist’ bent on the surreptitious blindsiding of the group. I cannot even be called a creationist at this point (or evolutionist) for, as I have indicated, I am unsure what to make of the subject myself — hence my various postings.Uncomfortable as it may be ‘on the fence’, I am Trying to be as Open-Minded as I can on the matter. I would like to think that a totally honest, open-minded Christian in these matters is not so foreign to one’s worldview that one sees hidden agendas in my postings. I assure all, moreover, that I have no intention of ‘launching a creationist tirade’ at any point — I certainly would not have the knowledge.And yes, my quest for truth necessarily involves going into the ‘lion’s den’ as it were, and risking any manner of abuse. This is, in fact, how I have approached all manner of issues in the past, in somewhat 'bulldog' fashion, not giving up until I have my answer. And yes, I do open myself up to a certain amount of flack that way.Why don’t I respond more? To be honest, science is not my strong suit, and much of the terminology is foreign to me; thus I persistently find myself reaching for google or Wikipedia, first of all to define such terms, and second to understand the science for which they are employed. I am compiling an ever-growing glossary of terms as we speak.I am saddened that my ignoring of the more ‘hostile’ posts (yes, Prezzie...) is interpreted as ‘lulling the group into a false sense of security’. More conventionally, my response might be regarded as ‘turning the other cheek’.Regarding Prezzie’s post about ‘tracts’, it is precisely this sort of ‘quick fix’ stuff I am trying to avoid. I have learned in my long time as a Christian that the way to obtain truth about anything is to cut to the core of the matter, sit down with professors, exerts, etc.I am, as a matter of fact, already a little embarrassed at my original post above and its wording: I had thought it to be a legitimate question after I had asked it of a (evolutionist) biology teacher, who seemed genuinely stumped. Ah well, I stand corrected.As I say, I am a little bereft at the recent turn on this thread. I was actually getting an Enormous amount of data out of replies thus far, and am learning a great deal. It would be enormously frustrating if I were to have to find another group or forum as a source of information. I also post to the creation-evolution section at the ‘Christianforums’ site, as well as another forum I have just joined, but the response is not as deep as here.Those who feel disenchanted, by all means discontinue, but I would really appreciate further input from all.Pax vobis, and regards,
Greg