> Stasis is a good first example since it is so prevalent in
> the fossil record.
Stasis seems a poor example of a mechanism, since stasis
does not reflect a process.
> Another non neo-Darwinian mechanism is habitat tracking. The
> standard neo-Darwinian response to a changing environment is
> that the populations inhabiting that environment either
> adapt or go extinct.
This second example also seems rather uninteresting. Habitat
tracking is responding to a changing environment by moving to
a place where the old environment prevails. No genetic or
morphological evolution need be involved.
> Genetic drift is also arguably not a neo-Darwinian
> mechanism.
But drift is by definition change that has no apparent
consequences.
> All non-Mendelian inheritance mechanisms (including
> Lamarkian inheritance) are not neo-Darwinian, nor are
> they known to occur.
So why should we talk about them?
> Another mechanism that is not neo-Darwinian, but is
> specifically relevant to this Reflector, is supernatural
> selection.
Derek, I thought the business at hand was the criticizing
of Neo-Darwinian theory on its own biological terms. Judging
from the items you cite, one might think that there are no
scientific objections to Neo-Darwinism.
-- Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ cliff@noevalley.com