Selection Inefficiency

Jerry Bergman, authored 'Darwinism and the Deterioration of the Genome.' Data exists indicating that natural selection is not an efficient means by which deleterious traits are eliminated from genomes. Selection eliminates fatal genomic mistakes. Moderately harmful ones can be retained and passed on to future generations. Examples are abundant in individuals throughout populations. The abstract to the linked article follows (in blue):


An evaluation of DNA/RNA mutations indicates that they cannot
provide significant new levels of information. Instead, mutations will produce degradation of the information in the genome. This is the opposite of the predictions of the neoDarwinian origins model. Such genome degradation is counteracted by natural selection that helps maintain the status quo. Degradation results for many reasons, two of which are reviewed here. 1) there is a tendency for mutations to produce a highly disproportionate number of certain nucleotide bases such as thymine and 2) many mutations occur in only a relatively few places within the gene called "hot spots," and rarely occur in others, known as "cold spots." An intensive review of the literature fails to reveal a single clear example of a beneficial information- gaining mutation. Conversely, thousands of deleterious mutations exist, supporting the hypothesis that very few mutations are beneficial. These findings support the creation origins model.

If harmful mutations can escape the selection filter then on what basis must we assume that slightly advantagous ones, would not only be passed on, but become fixed in populations?