I doubt that this is an accurate statement since their definitions and statements of relative rates for "advantageous" and "deleterious" mutations provide references to genetics and molecular biology publications. A mutation is basically a change in the DNA of an offspring organism where that arrangement of the DNA is not present in parent organism(s).

The article does state that beneficial mutations are rare. It even gives a rate for beneficial mutations. Too bad it doesn't say that the rate is a ratio of beneficial to deleterious mutations. In fact, it seems to indicate that the rate is with respect to all reproductive events or at least all mutation events. So the article doesn't really support your contention that the rate of beneficial to harmful mutations is an extremely low ratio.

At least we now have a definition for beneficial mutation.

Per the article: Advantageou mutations are mutations that "lead to a higher fitness and hence per definition to more offspring of their bearer."

So, it might be reasonable to say that Deleterious mutations are mutations that lead to a lower fitness and hence per definition to less offspring of their bearer.

I guess that doesn't really support your contention that evolution theory claims that harmful mutations lead to death 100% of the time.

Is this part of your plan...to not get anything right? Well, it's your strawman. Run anywhere you like with him.