Evolution debate question. Help needed!
I had someone ask me this question,
Can you site a source which proves that organisms can develop useful mutations? Has it ever been observed, or just inferred by reverse engineering existing species?
I responded by posting a link
He then said:
Again, my argument is based on sexually reproducing species, but I disagree that what happened with that bacteria is 'evolution'. The genes to metabolise citrate were probably recessive, and since it was beneficial to the species, it became dominant. Just like it is possible but very unlikely for two white people to have a black baby. If it was beneficial in the environment to be black (extremely hot and sunny), the recessive gene would become dominant because if you aren't black you sunburn easily and get heat exhaustion easier. This is not evolution, it's natural selection, and does not produce new species.
Can someone clarify this and if I am wrong can you point me to a better example? Thanks
Co-Founder of the Atheist/Freethought website Pathofreason.com
Check it out