1. Why does each X-Man have a different power?
2. Why don't multiple X-Men have the same power?
3. Why don't children always inherit their parents powers they way you would think they would?
4. The evolutionary aspect is too dramatic and too diverse?

this blog was really true in so many ways and maybe Marvel could answer these questions in a future X-men story arc. 

I see where you've coming from, but I think some of the reasons you've listed are the reasons why people like the X-Men.  Being born a mutant was an easy way of giving a character powers without having to think of ways to survive gamma bombs or cosmic rays.  But it also meant that that kid in all of us got to dream about what our own mutant powers could be... 
 
As for Angel's wings, some of the more physical mutations do take longer to develop.  In the Angel: Revelations mini series, you saw a slow development of his wings, starting with gruesome welts on his back.  Yet Angel's mutation was originally more than just wings; he had light bones & eagle eye sight as well.  Yet you're right, most mutations do occur quite quickly. 
 
There are a few things that bother me about the X-Men (more than Matt Fraction, Greg Land or Terry Dodson).  One thing is the 'us & them' attitude it has developed over the last decade.  It isn't just 'fighting to protect a world that fears & hates them'.  Now it is 'Cyclops' personal crusade to kill as many mutants off in the name of preserving mutant kind'.  And there's the way that we have half a dozen regular X-Titles, yet we only have a spotlight on the same few characters over & over again.  With 200 mutants to choose from, why are we STILL watching Cyclops boss everyone else around & sacrificing everyone else for Hope...?

Its comics dude

@Liberty: 
Why don't children always inherit their parents powers they way you would think they would?    
 
In 616: 
Magneto-Lorna (makes sense) Quicksilver (has his father's obvious physical characteristics but speed talents?) Scarlet Witch (abilities completely unlike her father)
Wolverine-Daken 
Mystique & Azazel-Nightcrawler 
Cyclops & Maddie Pryor (clone of Jean)-Cable 
 
Alternate Realities: 
Cyclops & Jean-Rachel Summers (powerset identical to her mother)
Cyclops & Emma- Ruby Summers (has her father & mother's powersets) 
 
These are the only ones I can think of right now. Looking at the low number of mutant parents, apparently most mutants are practicing safe sex which is always a good thing.

Although I agree with a lot in this blog, you have to think that this is a comic book. It was created in the 60s, a time where genetics were as advanced as today. And also think that the writers weren't experts in genetics. Take for example Spider-Man's origins, he was bitten by a radio-active spider. Such a small dose should have done nothing to him. But I would like to see an in-universe explanation about the things you mentioned.

"Good science fiction useally tries to keep up with the knowledge. "

"
Mutants was supposed to be an extreme leap in evolution. Its what made us on par with alien species. Skrulls shapeshift, Kree  come basically all super heroes in our book, similarly wth Shi'ar. We had super mutations. The leap in evolution created many powers which f time progressed normally, we would most likely see some powers being better and more likely to be passed on than say Ugly Johns.   On the subject of births, I believe that it only makes sense that to powers are directly related to birth and siblings should also have related powers, which is mostly true. Masterminds three kids all have powers related to illusions, with Pixie having powers that are also based on her mother. Theresa takes after Banshee.  With the Childrens crusade going on with the young Avengers we are gonna find out the true origins of Speed and Wiccan who take after Wanda and Pietro quite a bit.  When t comes to siblings we have the Summers, with related powers,  and the Frost family all psycics.  "

"I see where you've coming from, but I think some of the reasons you've listed are the reasons why people like the X-Men.  Being born a mutant was an easy way of giving a character powers without having to think of ways to survive gamma bombs or cosmic rays.  But it also meant that that kid in all of us got to dream about what our own mutant powers could be...  As for Angel's wings, some of the more physical mutations do take longer to develop.  In the Angel: Revelations mini series, you saw a slow development of his wings, starting with gruesome welts on his back.  Yet Angel's mutation was originally more than just wings; he had light bones & eagle eye sight as well.  Yet you're right, most mutations do occur quite quickly.  There are a few things that bother me about the X-Men (more than Matt Fraction, Greg Land or Terry Dodson).  One thing is the 'us & them' attitude it has developed over the last decade.  It isn't just 'fighting to protect a world that fears & hates them'.  Now it is 'Cyclops' personal crusade to kill as many mutants off in the name of preserving mutant kind'.  And there's the way that we have half a dozen regular X-Titles, yet we only have a spotlight on the same few characters over & over again.  With 200 mutants to choose from, why are we STILL watching Cyclops boss everyone else around & sacrificing everyone else for Hope...? "

there are a lot things about comics that don't make sense scientifically
 
1. being bitten by a radioactive spider will not give you the same abilities of a spider
 2. being at ground zero of a gamma bomb will not turn you in to a giant, super strong, green man
3. getting splashed with radioactive chemicals does not enhance your senses and give you a radar sense
4. there are no green rings flying around the universe that give you super powers
5. there is no hidden island full of Amazons
 
I could go on and on but I think that's enough....it's called "suspension of disbelief"....don't over think things...just sit back and enjoy the story

  Can't think to realistically about comics or the often lacking logic may put you off.

"
Mutants was supposed to be an extreme leap in evolution. Its what made us on par with alien species. Skrulls shapeshift, Kree  come basically all super heroes in our book, similarly wth Shi'ar. We had super mutations. The leap in evolution created many powers which f time progressed normally, we would most likely see some powers being better and more likely to be passed on than say Ugly Johns.   On the subject of births, I believe that it only makes sense that to powers are directly related to birth and siblings should also have related powers, which is mostly true. Masterminds three kids all have powers related to illusions, with Pixie having powers that are also based on her mother. Theresa takes after Banshee.  With the Childrens crusade going on with the young Avengers we are gonna find out the true origins of Speed and Wiccan who take after Wanda and Pietro quite a bit.  When t comes to siblings we have the Summers, with related powers,  and the Frost family all psycics.  "

"

I will admit I am not an expert on the X-Men and the reason for it is I don't like them that much.  I have around 250 X-men related comic and have read a few more.  I have seen most of all the cartoons and movies (some of these I have seen several times).  So, it is with that amount of experience that I am writing this blog.  
 
What I don't like about the X-Men is not the characters but, the very premise they are based on.  It is the problem of genetics.  Stan Lee said himself that the hard part to making superheroes was creating an origin story that gave them power.  With the X-Men you don't have to do that.   Here are my problems.

1. Why does each X-Man have a different power?
2. Why don't multiple X-Men have the same power?
3. Why don't children always inherit their parents powers they way you would think they would?
4. The evolutionary aspect is too dramatic and too diverse?

 

This is a lot so let me try to explain.  Take Archangel for example.  In evolution an animal does not just one day grow wings.  It is a very slow process that takes generations to develop.  The animal will develop feathers and smaller wings and one day generation later the animal will fly.  
 
Look at it genetically.  If two non mutants have a baby they are most likely to have a non-mutant baby.  If a mutant and a non mutant have a baby, the child should either inherit the ability of the mutant parent or the non-mutant parent.  It could also be some combination of the two.  If two mutants have a child then the child should have some sort of power that the parent has.  This is not absolute but most likely depending on the progressiveness of the gene.  If there is some mutant in the direct family tree somewhere than it is still possible to have a mutant child but it would be more rare the father back in the family tree the mutant is. 
 

There are thousands of mutants in the Marvel universe and they all seem to have different powers.  It would seem that many of them should have the same or similar powers.  Perhaps there is something I am missing.  If I have made a terrible error let me know? "

@xerox-kitty:  Great comments.  You know a lot more about the X-Men than I do.  By the way, you gave me my final quest too.  Now I have all quests I can without being a moderator.  One thing however about Angel.  To develop an evolutionary trait in one generation is unheard of.  So that is what I was tryig to say about the speed of his evolution.

" @BuddyBulson:   Sorry, I dared ask the question.  Oh wait I'm not.  I am just trying to facilitate a conversation and I keep getting the same response.  It's what the writers want.  I have read similar blogs about Superman and others.  Why is this one the one I'm not allowed to question?  At least now I now why it has gone unaddressed for so long none f the readers demand more.  At least in books like Superman they try to address issues that don't quite add up.  He has gone through many incarnations.  Apparently X-Man readers say "don't question it, just read it."     "

@VIZION2010:

@xerox-kitty:

Well to start, the problem with your premise is that it seems to be based on the idea that X-Men is portraying Darwinian Evolution. It isn't. It's portraying Lamarkian Evolution; a theory of evolution long discredited by Darwinian Evolution. I read this once in a Special Issue of Wizard magazine portraying the X-Men. X-Men is portraying the idea, what if Lamark was right?  I'm not sure how accurate X-Men comics version of Lamarkian Evolution is though.   Also, mutations are not completely natural. I believe the Celestials are the original source of X-Men Mutations.  Below are a few excerpts from a wiki and other sites.  
 

 One million years ago, an alien race called the Celestials came to Earth and performed genetic experiments on proto-humanity, incorporating and altering DNA in the genetic code of the early species of the genus Homo to allow future generations to gain superpowers, making the Celestials the source of all mutants.

 Lamarck's contribution was a systematic theoretical framework for understanding evolution. He saw evolution as comprising two processes;

1. Le pouvoir de la vie (a complexifying force) - in which the natural, alchemical movements of fluids would etch out organs from tissues, leading to ever more complex construction regardless of the organ's use or disuse. This would drive organisms from simple to complex forms.
2. L'influence des circonstances (an adaptive force) - in which the use and disuse of characters led organisms to become more adapted to their environment. This would take organisms sideways off the path from simple to complex, specialising them for their environment.    

 " 

 Your children will inherit your body-mods. Maybe the earliest evolutionary theorist was Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) who believed in the idea of "soft inheritance," where you pass on your acquired characteristics to your kids. If your body adapts to circumstances during your life — for example, if a particular organ gets smaller because you use it less — then your children will inherit it. (That organ will be smaller in your kids.) In fact, only genetic changes are passed on. But that doesn't stop science fiction from presenting changes to a creature's body, or non-genetic adaptations that you make in the course of your life, as being heritable. (Lamarck's ideas are sometimes mischaracterized as, "if you lose a leg, you'll have one-legged children," but he wasn't that silly.) In David Cronenberg's 1979 classic The Brood, a cutting-edge psychotherapy causes patients to manifest their darkest emotions in their own bodies — and one transformed woman gives birth to monster children that she can control telepathically.

Great Blog.  X-Men are big because it became a "cool" book when Jim Lee was on it... when it was dying down it became a "cool book" again when Grant Morrison was on it.
 
X-Men sell hype/X-Overs, sex  and pyrotechnics. I am not trying to hate on all the X-Men, I like Wolverine, I hate his spin-off like Daken and X-23. 
 
back to the topic.. you are right... if genetics is to play a part.... how come Cable is the the way he is when his parents are "bad ass".  
 
and I love the math you did :D
Non-Mutant + Non Mutant (should) = Non - Mutant.
Non-Mutant + Mutant (should) = only powers possible to inherit are the mutant parents powers.  That is like brown eyes being more dominate then blue eyes, its science.
 
Good read as normal buddy!
Cheers!

evolution does react to the environment and considering that marvel's earth is home to many mystical and demonic threats perhaps the evolutionary path is trying to adapt to all this not to mention the celestial tampering and kree experimentation that earth has gone thru

It gets a little confusing when you consider the Celestials involvement as they're basically the "God" of the MU. They created the Eternals and the Deviants (Angels and Demons respectively) in addition to the Inhumans and initiated the advancement of homo sapiens. Residual tampering left the possibility of humans obtaining access to a Celestial energy matrix previously exclusive to Eternals. It's the capability to tap this energy source that categorizes mutant-humans. 
 
This theory seems sound, but what makes a mutant isn't exclusive to Celestial involvement. Franklin Richards is a prime example of a super-powered individual spawned by meta-human parents altered by cosmic rays. This fact should exclude him from the genus homo superior as his "mutation" is directly linked to the same cosmic energies that bombarded Richard and Sue....but he's often referred to as a powerful "mutant". 
The Fenris Twins and Mimic were exposed to radiation within the womb making them meta-human and The Purple Man's daughter, Persuasion, inherited her father's abilities which he gained being doused in chemicals, making himself and her meta-human and NOT mutant, at least by what I see as a natural mutation. 
 
Although she was retconned into a mutant, Psylocke is actually an otherworlder/human hybrid along with her brothers. Being a hybrid of 2 species doesn't make an X-factor carrying mutant. I love her all the same though ;)
 
Latent mutants are genetically predisposed to produce mutant offspring but don't exhibit uncanny abilities themselves (but in some cases under extreme duress, accelerated adrenaline can grant a temporary boost in power out of self-preservation or when pregnant with a mutant fetus can exhibit the powers of that offspring. i.e. Haven)

 @Liberty:   You are confusing mutation in normal evolution, with mutation in the Marvel U due to having an X-Gene.  The first works as you say, and if you think about it, a great percentage of the population is actually technically mutants.  Mutants in the Marvel U have an X-Gene.  Apparently, the X-Gene manifests as these radical different powers.  A character has to inherit the X-Gene according to normal rules of genetics, I would think, but how that gene _manifests_ is not dependent on the parents.  IOW, what you inherit is the _ability_ to have a power, not the particular power you parents had.

To be honest I don't like Marvel comics very much.  The concepts infuriate me.  I hate telling people this because it is sacrilegious but I don't like Stan Lee or Jack Kirby either.  There is hardly a character or concept they created that I like. To be honest I can not think of one.  I like origins. I like a good story. I like science fiction. Those two seemed to do everything they could to avoid making good stories (Just my opinion)   I also have to say that DC is not guiltless but they don't seemed to be as guilty.  The New Gods, Newsboy Legion and The Boy Commandos are terrible in my humble opinion.  That is to say not every character stinks.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Big Barda grew on me for example.

I'm glad you like the blog and you are right. I am even happier that you responded the way you do. I really enjoyed reading it

"...I hate telling people this because it is sacrilegious but I don't like Stan Lee or Jack Kirby either.  There is hardly a character or concept they created that I like. To be honest I can not think of one..."

here is my thoughts on why each x-man has a different power: the x-gene allows their mind to tap into another dimension that alters reality and their mind subconciously chooses how it alters reality (power-wise) based on personality and strength of the x-gene.