> CL:==
> >The only quantifiable aspect of complexity I know of is number
> >of parts. In this limited sense segmented organisms (such as
> >vertebrates) are decreasing in complexity. Of course complexity
> >in every other sense may be increasing; but even so, this apparent
> >pattern brings a non-Darwinian implication of finitude to the process.
> Could you clarify why this would be a "non-Darwinian implication"?
Evolution is normally thought of as an open-ended process, capable
of anything, given enough time. The notion of morphological
evolution 'running down'--running out of parts which are free
to be adapted to new purposes--is not something evolutionists
would easily accept. I don't accept it myself, in a broad view
of evolution, but I have no choice but to accept it as fact within
the specific context of vertebrate evolution from the Cambrian to
the present. Theoretically a vertebrate lineage could break out of
this pattern, but this has not been observed.
-- Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ cliff@noevalley.com