Help

Can someone help, I got myself into a debate with a theist over evolution but I only have a basic understanding of it. I've being holding my own for a while but now one of his arguements has stumped me.
Random mutations do not produce new life forms. DNA, the basic information system of the cell, contains the blue prints needed to manufacture 2,000 or more different proteins. Each of these proteins is manufactured in little "cell factories" at the direction of the DNA and is essential for the maintenance of life. So, which came first? If DNA is essential in the manufacturing process of proteins and the manufacturing process produces the proteins essential to DNA, then you cant have one without the other. Proteins are necessary to make DNA, but DNA is needed to make proteins. They both must have been created fully functional and at exactly the same point in time. The genetic information of DNA cannot be improved upon. Natural Selection does not produce new genes. Natural Selection selects the best-suited animal or plant for a specific niche or environment. This is adaption to a specific environment, not mutation. Mutation in a gene is a rare event. How could life have evolved into all its millions of forms if mutation is a rare event? When mutations occur in nature they are either harmful to the organism or harmless(neutral). Mutations are harmless or neutral at best, lethal at worst, and never have been proven in undisturbed nature to be beneficial. So if natural selection is true then the harmful mutations should contribut to extinctions, not to new better life forms. All through nature we observe extinctions rather than emerging new life forms. Extinctions happen a lot in nature. So if mutations and natural selections dont produce new life forms then where did all the creatures we see today come from? God had to have created them.

I should really start trying to learn more about evolution.

[WITHTEETH]

Well there is a general misconception with theist because of Christian arogance They say that a genetic mutation of new information isn't proven, and does not happen. This is false and its a kind of trick question that theist have. Basicaly new information is how we evolved new frontal lobes or other working parts. it doesn't include virus' where they just became stronger. they want added NEW information not added OLD information. Heres one example of a genetic increase in information - http://www.nmsr.org/nylon.htm Nylon Bug, Drosophila sperm axoneme, sodium channel gene SCN11A, Adaptive evolution of a duplicated pancreatic ribonuclease gene in a leaf-eating monkey, A Transposable Element-Mediated Gene Divergence that Directly Produces a Novel Type Bovine Bcnt Protein Including the Endonuclease Domain of RTE-1, evolution of a hominoid gene that supports high neurotransmitter flux. here are some examples of a genetic increase of information.Christian think tanks don't even clearly define precisely what they mean by evolution has no genetic increase of new information, they keep on setting the boundary farther and farther as scientists breakthrough their bullshit.

[WITHTEETH]

http://ravingatheist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=3359 Here are other repeated arguments theists have.

All ya need is right here - http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Also in this thread on post #490 I go over mutations briefly:

http://ravingatheist.com/forum/viewt...p?id=3179&p=33

Umm, yeah....RNA manufactures proteins...
OK, done!