Re: Haldane's Dilemma -- talk.origins rehash

Glenn Morton (grmorton@psyberlink.net)
Wed, 18 Jun 1997 20:47:10 -0500

At 11:02 AM 6/17/97 -0500, john queen wrote:

> What amazes me is the lack of discussion of the effects of random
>mutations on the genome. Natural selection is named as proof but even this
>makes no sense. Even if there were were some favorable mutations by random
>chance, what about the non-favorable mutations? If we say these did not
>happen or somehow dont count then we are fooling ourselves. New
>generations(using the evolutionist models) would only provide more
>opportunities for random mutations.

Why don't you visit my web page, download the computer programs and run the
one called selection. The system has a genome which is randomly mutated,
and those genomes most able to generate a morphology which is close to that
chosen by the user is mutated again and again and again, randomly.
Eventually this random mutation finds a genome which produces the desired
shape.

Place that in a chemical system where a molecule is needed to catalyze a
particular reaction, random mutation can produce the desired molecular
catalyst. I would also suggest seen Gerald Joyce, Scientific American, Dec.
1992 where useful chemicals are now manufactured via random mutation and
selection. See also Peter Radetsky, "Speeding Through Evolution" Discover
May, 1994, circa p. 85

These articles discuss how industry and universities are taking polymers,
randomly mutating them, testing them for a particular function (i.e. cutting
DNA, cutting dye molecules, etc). The earliest attempts have only limited
functionality. But by letting the most efficient molecules in each
generation be the forebears for the next generation of molecules (and
mutating them) one eventually and rapidly finds highly functional molecules.

Ask yourself this. If random mutation plus selection were so bad, why would
chemical industries use this procedure to make new molecules? Industry
wants functionality, efficiency and cost savings. This procedure delivers
on all three. You should really become more familiar with the material you
are critiquing.

glenn

Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm