Re: [asa] Example of fast evolutionary change

On 7/13/07, Jon Tandy <tandyland@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Seems to me it's a little early to conclusively declare victory for the
> male butterfly's rapid evolution, since it was only last year that the large
> increase in population was discovered. What about next year, or 5 years
> from now? Was it a temporary increase which will be wiped out in a few
> years? Was it coincidentally a bad year for the parasite? Nevertheless, it
> is interesting to ponder.
>

It seems to me that the wondering if it will be a "good" change in the long
run is rather missing the point. If it turns out not to be so good (all
things considered) they'll simply be weeded out and the evolution will
continue, even if punctuated. Although it may not be "victory" for the
butterfly, the point is that punk eek is not merely ad hoccing as the IDists
would say; things really can and do work that way.

This reminds me of an AiG article where they tried to claim that rapid
evolutionary change was *too* fast for evolutionary theory! What
self-contradictory illogical nonsense.

-David Buller (ASA)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jul 13 12:04:02 2007