Is there really such a thing as a beneficial mutation?

Hi Faith and others I am new to this and a bit slow at the key board. I hope to learn fast.Yes there are benificial mutations. But thats not the issue. What is, is how a net gain of genetic information come about?The wrong type of changeAre there ”good’ mutations? Evolutionists can point to a small handful of cases in which a mutation has helped a creature to survive better than those without it. Actually, they need to take a closer look. Such ”good’ mistakes are still the wrong types of changes to turn a fish into a philosopher”they are headed in precisely the wrong direction. Rather than adding information, they destroy information, or corrupt the way it can be expressed (not surprising, since they are random mistakes).For example, beetles losing their wings. A particular winged beetle type lives on large continental areas; the same beetle type on a small windy island has no wings.What happened is easy to imagine. Every now and then in beetle populations, there might be a mutational defect which prevents wings from forming. That is, the ”wing-making’ information is lost or scrambled in some way.The damaged gene (a gene is like a long ”sentence’ carrying one part of the total instructions recorded on the DNA) will then be passed to all that beetle’s offspring, and to theirs, as it is copied over and over. All these descendant beetles will be wingless.If a beetle with such a wingless defect is living on the Australian mainland, for example, it will have less chance to fly away from beetle-eaters, so it will be more likely to be eliminated by ”survival of the fittest’ before it can leave offspring. Such so-called ”natural selection’ can help to eliminate (or at least reduce the buildup of) such genetic mistakes.
Blown awayHowever, on the windy island, the beetles which can fly tend to get blown into the sea, so not having wings is an advantage. In time, the elimination of all the winged ones will ensure that only those of this new ”wingless’ variety survive, which have therefore been ”naturally selected.’ ”There!’ says the evolutionist. ”A favorable mutation”evolution in action!’ However, it fails to make his case, because though beneficial to survival, it is still a defect”a loss or corruption of information. This is the very opposite of what evolutionists need to demonstrate real evolution.