Cumulative Active Mutation Theory (Real Part 2)

[TheVirus]

Well, finally, the big moment. But first, some things i want to clarify:
-This is probably not a valid biological theory, it's just intended to create discussion which might expose other topics, which may help some of you to show your knowledge or learn something new.
-Even if it is a valid theory, what it suggests is so unlikely to happen (like 1 in a googolplex of googolplexes) that it has probably never happened and will never happen again. It is so improbable that is just an inch away from imposibility.
-Bear in mind that my friend who made it up is 15 years old, not even a biology student, just a fan who aspires to be one.
Here we go:
As someone cleverly guessed before, the CAM theory suggests that all mutations lead to a positive mutation, even neutral mutations and gives a possible (or impossible) purpose for them. Even though almost every neutral mutation has no effect on the individual who carries it, if this mutation was to happen to be in a sperm cell or egg cell, it could be passed on to the next generation, right? Now, if this next generation, manages to pass it on to the next one, and that to the next one and so on, sometime (in thousands of years maybe) one of the individuals may suffer a new neutral mutation, and if this mutation happened to take place in the same gene that had suffered the original neutral mutation (in a very very miraculously event), maybe both mutations together can actually get the gene to code for something different, leading to an eventual active mutation (a cumulative active mutation), which would actually serve a biological evolutionary process.
So, what do you think? Does it makes sense to you at all? Is there anything you'd like to change? Does it seem barely possible? Discuss.
Thanks for waiting.

[JackBean]

It depends...
if you(r friend) mean it as an accidental process, that is, there is no will to take these mutations, than is it basically what happens everydeay. But watch out! These cumulative mutations can be also negative of course!!!
if is it meant to be cause with some will or something, than no, it sucks

[TheVirus]

Of course it's NOT the cause of some will. No one has control over this, unless you believe in god, which i don't (and my friend doesn't either). Plus, if it wasn't an accidental process, and "someone" decided this, i'm sure he could make it happen a little more often.
I repeat, no, my (and my friend's, of course) view of this is of a completely accidental random process.

[MrMistery]

this is not very improbable at all considering evolutionary time. I think this has probably happened many times throughout evolution

[Darby]

This is definitely an accepted mechanism in the generation of new alleles, so your friend has figured out something that really works. Even if it's already known, figuring it out on your own is quite an accomplishment.

It's just that most mutations aren't just neutral, they happen in non-coding sections of the DNA, so most cumulative changes are great for evolutionary comparisons, but don't seem to do much else.

[TheVirus]

Thanks, i'll tell my friend. He'll be thrilled.