Chris
>This last is true. Natural selection works on variations.
>If the variations don't occur, selection won't help.
>But, *are* the variations planned? If
>so, why are there so many that don't make it?
Hi Chris,
I must say you seem to have suddenly turned as tame as a pussy cat, and it is
a pleasure to talk to you. It is my belief that most variations which "don't
make it" are ones which fail to follow the design and don't allow the
organism to function. Natural selection had nothing to do with it. I do
agree natural selection works on minor variations which do not add complexity
and thus ensures stasis. Perhaps you consider any variation an increase in
complexity. Am I allowed to disagree on this?
Chris:
>Why do they have a random distribution?
Bertvan:
Since those mutations which everyone could agree involved increase in
complexity are rare, I doubt our measurements are accurate enough to say with
certainty they have a random distribution.
Chris:
>Why do they occur regardless of whether they are beneficial
>to the organism? Why is there no obvious skewing in the direction of
>favorable variations?
Bertvan:
Does it have to be obvious? Couldn't it be subtle?
>Chris:
>If variations are planned, why isn't evolution
>proceeding at thousands or millions of times its known rates?
Bertvan:
Whatever the cause of the variations, the changes were apparently so fast
that we have difficulty even imagining all the "missing links", much less
finding them in the fossil record. I don't know why you think it should be
even faster. Maybe being fast isn't part of the plan.
Bertvan
http://members.aol.com/bertvan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 09 2000 - 14:06:38 EDT