This re-instated what passes for faith in humanity

[Occhidiangela]

So you are just arguing the semations of the word "mutation"?

Most scientists I have known use "mutation" to describe any gentic change that isnt engineered(such as gene therapy)

The use of the word "devolve" in these contexts is misleading.  Evolution is change over  time - not improvements over time.  Selective pressure is is required for what we see as improvements.  Over time in a natural setting only the rare helpful changes are selected for, the more common deliterious changes are selected against the the most common neutral changes are selected for or against only to the degree they are "linked" to a helpful or deliterious change.
Anyway your blanket statment that all mutations are bad(in the context of a lab experiment) just shows that you dont understand neither bio-chemical genitics nor population gentics.

Your posting style, over time, shows that you understand neither spelling nor grammar. It is time to call in the Grammar Inquisition --

Nobody expects the Grammar Inquisition! Our chief weapons are fear, surprise, caffeine, and an almost fanatical devotion to the OED or Webster or Merriam or some other mold covered tome!

Cardinal Biggles, read the charges.

1. Using a word that either does not exist, or is wholly obscure. Semation.

Sematic, biology, adj meaning 'serving as a sign or warning of danger, as in colors or markings.'

No entry for semation, RH and M Webster. dictionary.com agrees. I have no subscription to M-W unabridged. Is there such a word? If so, what is the reference and the definition, and how does it fit into that sentence? Jury still out, charge held in abeyance.( I was so hoping you had introduced us to a $64 word.)

2. Using a sloppy double negative

Anyway your blanket statment that all mutations are bad(in the context of a lab experiment) just shows that you dont understand neither bio-chemical genitics nor population gentics.

Correct phrase: "shows that you understand neither biochemical genetics nor population genetics."
While I am addressing the double negative, in the same sentence there are five errors:

1. Missed space before the first paren in multiple places. (a common error)
2. Missing apostrophe in the word "don't" (Wankerage)
3. The word "dont" created a double negative. Its inclusion is completely useless in that sentence, given your intended meaning. (Wankerage again)
4 & 5. The word "genetics" spelled incorrectly in two different ways in the same sentence. (Bloody Wankerage)

More fun from further up . . .

5. Double use of the word "is:" "selective pressure is is" (Clintonian Wankerage)
6. Double use of the word "the:" selected against the the most common neutral changes (Wankerage)
7. "isnt" lacks apostrophe ("isn't engineered" is correct) (Wankerage)
8. Run on sentences (common error)

In a technically informative post you put on an abysmal display of Wankerage.

Use the "Preview" button. Read your post backwards before you post it. That is an old proofreading trick. It works.

The bottom line on my sig is a call to action.

In the interest of being taken seriously, please quit posting like a Wanker. Your ideas, positions, and opinions are worthy of consideration on their own merit. The disrespect you show your reading audience by habitual misuse of the written word is appalling.

Doc, quit sniggering over there, your posts aren't much more polished. :blink:

Occhi