I know that many believe that differing atmospheric conditions
aided in the formation of life. This is an explanation thats been used to
help ease the concern for lack of mechanistic evidence or plausibilty of
such an occurence, even though it does not serve it's purpose very well.
What I am concerned with(in this posting) is evolutionary mechanisms after
the environment became similar to modern day ie.. the time period when
primates and etc began evolving into humans. What mechanisms are there
besides random genetic mutations.
In high school and college the 'how the giraffe got a long neck'
explanation was used. But I think it's now known that this type of
mechanism makes no scientific sense. Ive read about the different colored
moths, but I think that it's pretty unanimous that this has nothing to do
with evolution(the creations of new cells, tissues, organs, organ systems,
blood types, immune systems etc an etc an etc).
I know that some get aggrivated when they read the term random
genetic mutations because they believe that natural laws guided mutations.
However, in advance of response I would like to say that this type later
evolution would of had to experienced the same laws and environment that we
are experiencing. In other words, I dont want to hear the same answers for
the start of life that basicly say 'things must have been
different(atmosphere, temperature, gravity? etc) to the point that it
could happen' because it had to of happened (I hear this from profs). (
Also I dont want to read quotes dated before 1950:)(thats a smile)
Eventhough I am active in biochemical research I know that I am not
aware of all of the research and theories that are out there.
hey--- have a good weekend and dont slaughter my comments too
much---no inflicted jpeg images unless it is totally required:)(smile again)
john w. queen ii