more problems for the "directed mutation" zealots

However, again only the dishonest zealot would continue to use "directed mutations" as an evolution refuter considering the fact that the overwhelming weight of evidence is against them.So, I guess you are ignoring my example?Typical.
**************************It is actually worse than that...there is plenty of evidence for random mutation AND there is also evidence against non-random mutation yet the zealots continue to claim things like "the jury is still out".Maybe Peter will explain where in the alignment you provided the non-random mutations are?