This is true, but that's all that it takes. Most of the time mutations cause problems in the production of protein synthesis which negatively affects the organism, but not always.very rarely a mutation might benefit the organism.
When mutations are not beneficial, the organism is more likely to die, and that mutated gene dies with the organism.
When a mutation is beneficial, which is more rare, the organism is more likely to survive and reproduce, which produces copies of that mutated gene, which can then spread through the gene pool.
So even though most mutations are harmful, the process of natural selection causes beneficial mutations to propagate and become more common.
This is not true, it's not a simple truth. Mutations are not all deleterious. There are multiple kinds of mutations, some mutations involve pieces of the DNA strand not being copied, these are deleterious because nucleotide bases are "lost", causing effectively a shorter gene. Other mutations, however, can simply change existing genes by swapping nucleotides, interposing nucleotide strings into other areas, or even duplicating nucleotides which effectively lengthens the DNA strand.Some bacteria can lose information for a controlling gene and become resistant to certain antibiotics but mutations do not create..they corrupt. If you can't grasp that simple truth, there is no use continuing this discussion with you.
Different strings of nucleotide bases cause different amino acids and subsequently different proteins to be synthesized, so if a gene has pieces that are moved around or flipped around, then entirely different proteins are produced, which results in changes in the phenotype (or physical structure of the creature). Changes are what occur, not "corruptions", just differences.
When strings of nucleotides are copied more than they should be, you end up with entirely new segments of genes that can effectively "add information" to the DNA strand.
So what is the problem, what is not possible here?
* A neutral mutation has no harmful or beneficial effect on the organism. Such mutations occur at a steady rate, forming the basis for the molecular clock.
* A deleterious mutation has a negative effect on the phenotype, and thus decreases the fitness of the organism.
* An advantageous mutation has a positive effect on the phenotype, and thus increases the fitness of the organism.
* A nearly neutral mutation is a mutation that may be slightly deleterious or advantageous, although most nearly neutral mutations are slightly deleterious.
This myth that mutations can only "delete" information is totally absurd, which is obvious with just a little logic.
Take any organism, take any gene in it's DNA strand, zoom in and change a single A nucleotide (Adenine) to a G nucleotide (Guanine). This is a simple Point Mutation. If you believe that this necessarily results in a "loss" of information, then what happens if, in the next generation, on that same DNA location, that G gets swapped with an A? This is called a Reverse Mutation, and it is common.
If going from the original A to a G is a "loss of information" then the equally possible swap from G to A must necessarily be a "gain of information".
Can you explain any reason why this is not so?