Evolution Proven To Be Impossible.

We are now in essence a banana republic as they are called, complete with bogus "President Elect" who is not legally President Elect but is called that by our corrupt media and the whole corrupt leftist gang, who continue to force their views on the rest of us, yes, even to the point of election fraud which very probably replaced enough Trump votes with enough Biden votes to steal the election.  We might have a chance to save ourselves from this destruction of our great American system except for the fact that there are among other things all too many nonleftists who think Donald Trump is a fascist or something other than the effective defender of true American values his supporters know him to be.  Thus are we likely lost.  Doomed.  No more America.  Well I knew it was coming years ago, why make a fuss about it when it's finally come?  We tried.   They were smarter.  

So I'm trying to ignore it all, there being nothing I can do about it, and have been entertaining myself with such pastimes as rereading the UC Berkeley web pages they call Evolution 101.  

There is one subject that is particularly relevant for my purposes, the "mechanisms of evolution," also called there "mechanisms of change" and "mechanisms of microevolution."  The same four "mechanisms" are listed for each designation.

They are Mutation, Migration, Genetic Drift and Natural Selection.  As I recall, when I read this site some fifteen or so years ago now-- it's changed some since then but this concept is pretty much the same -- it was this part of it that contributed most to launching me toward the thoughts I've been elaborating ever since.  I think the first post I wrote on the subject at EvC was titled something like "Natural Limitations to the Processes of Evolution"  I've been blocked from EvC so I can't go find out for sure.  I'd read up on some population genetics and spent some time thinking through the genetics involved in breeding programs, mainly dogs.  

So, Mutation, Migration, Genetic Drift and Natural Selection are given as the "Mechanisms" of the biological changes that are mistaken for evidence of the ToE.

 These four "mechanisms" are not very similar to each other.  Mutation hapopens at the genetic level, producing a new sequence for better or worse, Migration is the movement of individual animals from one place to another, Genetic Drift is the consequence of random selection of traits/genetic material that creates a subpopulation within a larger population, and Natural Selection is one of the ways a trait and its genetic substrate is favored in reproduction which results in the creation of a new gene pool, or supposedly ultimately a new species.   

What I noticed back then was that that Mutation and Migration add to the genetic pool while Natural Selection subtracts from it and Genetic Drift is one of many possible effects of a subtractive process.  I already thought of natural selection as a subtractive process because I'd been thinking about domestic breeding and how it's all about preeserving chosen traits from contamination by alien genes.   In other words nothing is ever added, all alien or unwanted traits are eliminated -- that's the subtraction -- and the whole idea is to pare down the genetic stuff to as many fixed alleles as possible, which is what creates the breed you want.

After having thought about this for so many years it's hard for me to understand why it isn't obvious that getting new phenotypes in nature has to follow the same path as getting them in domestic breeding:  in selecting a trait or set of traits you are eliminating all competing traits, and this means you are reducing the genetic variability in the new population.  And reducing genetic variability means you are reducing its opportunities for further phenotypic change.  If the genetic variation is quite high to begin with, continued development of new phenotypes can go on occurring for some time, even the formation of daughter populations with their own different phenotypic presentation, but the trend is always toward the reduction of genetic variability.  This fact absolutely defeats the ToE but it's utterly ignored.  Even when reduced genetic variability is recognized its implications for the ToE never enter the discussion.

So I discovered that such things have been discussed in population genetics circles but always with the idea of which phenomenon being considered has most to do with furthering evolution.  

I've always struggled with why Genetic Drift is taken so seriously.  I don't get it.  It's just one version of the processes that bring about a new population phenotype or its gene pool.  In other words it's just a version of the subtraction of traits and their alleles or genetic material of whatever  kind, in order that others come to expression, the old having disappeared.  It's always emphasized that genetic drift is random, as if this distinguishes it from other ways populations change.  The only method that could be considered not to be random is Natural Selection but the effect is the same.  A trait is eliminated, others favored and the allele for the rejected trait disappears from the population.  Subtraction.  The alleles for the selected trait or traits increase in number but nothing new has been added.  All that has happened is that one or some have been lost.  Subtraction.  Loss of genetic diversity.

Migration is just the REconnection of one population with another that had split at some time in the past.  During their separation new genetic combinations would have emerged, bringing out new phenotypes so that it looks like they are something new and different.  What keeps getting overlooked is that you can get dramatic differences in appearance just from inbreeding a new set of gene/allele frequencies in reproductive isolation.  Quite dramatic.  But the point here is that you get them because of the elimination, subtraction, of other forms of the traits involved.  

The ToE seems to be talked about as if there were endless genetic possibilities for change.  But if the phenotypic changes that suggest evolution in the first place turn out to be the product of eliminating genetic material the opposite from the usual expectation is the reality.

Mutation is like migration or gene flow except that it actually does bring something new into the genetic picture.  Usual a bad something or a neutral something.  But for it to be part of the population phenotype it has to be selected and all its competitors eliminated.  There's always going to be subtraction meaning always a loss of genetic diversity when you get new phenotypes.  

This is true even at the individual level.  Sexual reproducion is the process by which traits for the offspring are selected, quite randomly, all other possible traits possessed by the parents eliminated from the chosen genetic collection.  That's the formula.  It's elimination or loss that brings out the new traits.  

In one of the Attenborough films I watched recently there was footage of him as a younger man meeting an isolated tribe somewhere like Borneo or Irian Jaya, I don't remember.  Every time you see such a tribe of people who have been isolated for a very long time you can't fail to notice how strikingly distinct they are as a population, very similar to each other, clearly all of the same family, but identifiable as a group.  That's what a race is, just a population that has developed its own identifying traits in isolation over time.

That's how the ten lizards loosed on Pod Mrcaru developed their characteristic huge head and jaws over the thirty years they were left alone there.  they started out with normal sized heads and jaws like their parent population and all it took was their reproductive isolation over somenumber of genertations to bring out the traits they now all shared.  Breeding only among themsleves their own peculiar set of gene frequencies got recombined and passed on over and over again down the generations without the input of genes from the original population they'd come from.

There is no exception to this.  Evolution is impossible because of how genetics works.  Certainly there are lots more examples to be explored and lots more angles on the question that are also fun to pursue, but I dare claim that this is the rock bottom definitive falsification of the ToE.   Tty all the chess moves you can think of, if you're smart enough and honest enough you have to come to this same conclusion.