After all is said and done, l have no problem with it because those who are giving abuse or avoiding the question are only highlighting my position that: 1. There is no scientific observation of a genetic mutation leading to evolutionary advancement, in the lab or in the wild - yet it is the basis of many people's entire world view 2. People have a disturbing tendency to accept claims from well groomed men in white robes, be they some temple outfit or lab coats. 3. People are unaware how science works, they think it is a big book of indisputable lore. It takes on an almost supernatural aura. Actually science is just a method of fishing for facts, that's all. Although it has to be said, it takes a lot of diligence and skill to get anywhere. But we who have contributed to the sciences are always open to revising our views, there is no dogma no ego in science. In fact science is the ideal mindset of the religious believer. That's one interesting spinoff of this debate l want to subtly bring out - that the Believer and the scientist are cool headed and not ego. And as it happens, both believer and scientist should reject evolution by gene mutation which at best is a philosophical gloss, a backstory, not even a good one compared to my one with the dragons and the women with sixpacks. Wait what was the topic .. ? 4. People seem to think evolution is the bedrock of science. It isn't. 5. People seem to think there is only one possible theory of evolution, when in fact the sky's the limit. (Unless you count panspermia in which case you go way beyond even the sky, but panspermia is hilarious to me, l'm happy to discuss it elsewhere) 6. People seem to think rejection of genetic evolution is antiscience, when in fact many people working in various sciences reject it. E.g. Creationists, but alas Creationism has developed into a specific response with its own idiosyncracies some of which l would argue against and so it's no longer merely a belief that God manages everything at every level all the time (which is what l believe) 7. People get outraged when confronted with something new which requires them to rethink (even when the OP predicts this and admonishes against it) 8. Ironically, that is: they rage when they are required to rethink something they accepted without much thought to begin with So what l have unfolded is the human comedy. But l want to keep the thread about only the thread title, and yes l relish the spin-off about exposing the human comedy. You say it's too technical. However, as another poster has shown, similar topics have been raised before. It sits well here. Moreover, it's not even too technical: just show one mutation observed in realtime. That's all. You should know why you believe in it. It was nontechnical enough for you to subscribe to the idea to begin with. There is nothing wrong with the thread as per my contributions to it. If there is content within it that is against forum rules, you're welcome to remove that but none of my content was.