Darwinian code dating
They said there was a "paucity of classic sweeps revealed by our findings". In this case the fruit flies weighed less, lived shorter lives, and were less resistant to starvation. Except for number 11, the changes found in over 60,000 generations of bacteria were due to the disruption, degradation, or loss of genetic information.
Sweeps "were too infrequent within the past 250,000 years to have had discernible effects on genomic diversity." "Classic sweeps were not a dominant mode of human adaptation over the past 250,000 years." --Hernandez, Ryan D., Joanna L. Cord Melton, Adam Auton, Gilean Mc Vean, 1000 Genomes Project, Guy Sella, Molly Przeworski. Classic Selective Sweeps Were Rare in Recent Human Evolution. There were many mutations, but none caught on, and the experiment ran into the . The ability to use citrate in the presence of oxygen, trumpeted by evolutionists as a big deal, was the result of previously existing information being rearranged, not the origin of new information.
Scientists like to study them because a generation (from egg to adult) takes only 9 days. Here is how the imaginary part is supposed to happen: On rare occasions a mutation in DNA improves a creature's ability to survive, so it is more likely to reproduce (natural selection).
The term macroevolution, by contrast, refers to the origin of new species and divisions of the taxonomic hierarchy above the species level, and also to the origin of complex adaptations, such as the vertebrate eye.
Macroevolution posed a problem to Darwin because his principle of descent with modification predicts gradual transitions between small-scale adaptive changes in populations and these larger-scale phenomena, yet there is little evidence for such transitions in nature.
Only mutations in the reproductive (germ) cells of an animal or plant would be passed on.
Mutations in the eye or skin of an animal would not matter.