# Kondrashov's Paradox: Why We Haven't Died 100 Times Over

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/kondrashovs-paradox-why-we-havent-died-100-times-over/17840>\
**Category:** Conversation\
**Tags:** Science\
**Created:** [May 26, 2026, 4:17pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/kondrashovs-paradox-why-we-havent-died-100-times-over/17840 "2026-05-26T16:17:31Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 39

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mercer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Mercer](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Mercer)\
**Post date:** [June 1, 2026, 3:58pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/kondrashovs-paradox-why-we-havent-died-100-times-over/17840/39 "2026-06-01T15:58:22Z")

</div>

> [@UncensoredPilgrims](#):
>
> Can you explain why that would be certain?

The Poisson distribution.

> [@UncensoredPilgrims](#):
>
> The reason there is a “mutation rate” is that replication is never 100% perfect.

The most common mutations, transitions, are most commonly caused by keto-enol tautomerization of the **substrate**. They are in no way errors. If you believe that God directly designed life, God designed the reason for the vast majority of mutations. Therefore, the concept of perfection is irrelevant.

> [@UncensoredPilgrims](#):
>
> > [@Mercer](#):
> >
> > Yet polymorphism exists, is now routinely measured, and differs dramatically between populations of humans. How do you explain that?
> 
> I don’t know what you’re asking me to explain exactly.

That’s precisely my point. Polymorphism, an important concept that you don’t understand. Your focus on mutation blinds you to it. Ironically, polymorphism, not mutation, is what Darwin observed.

> [@UncensoredPilgrims](#):
>
> Historically, there’s a lot that is different between different people groups. Patriarchal drive refers to how older men produce offspring with more mutations…

You obviously don’t understand. My challenge to you to explain polymorphism has absolutely nothing to do with mutations, unless you’re trying to claim that wildly different mutation rates are responsible. Are you?

> [@UncensoredPilgrims](#):
>
> > [@John\_Harshman](#):
> >
> > There is no single moment when a population stops belonging to one species and starts belonging to another.
> 
> Logically, there would have to be, since evolution happens in time, which is a string of moments. So either no species ever come into being, or they do and there is a moment when it happens.

That’s absurd. One can see its absurdity by applying it to language. Languages evolve over time, which is a string of moments. So either no languages ever come into being, or they do and there is a moment when it happens.

So, Paul, when was the moment that a person first spoke French?

So, two things you obviously don’t understand.

1. Evolution only happens to populations, never individuals.
2. Most drift and selection acts upon existing polymorphisms, which outnumber the new mutations you’re so obsessed with by ??? to one.

I suggest that you learn what that ratio is for humans before pontificating any more. It is an objective, empirical fact.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/kondrashovs-paradox-why-we-havent-died-100-times-over/17840)._