Re: How could evolution result in IC systems?

From: Chris Cogan (ccogan@telepath.com)
Date: Sat Sep 16 2000 - 23:47:01 EDT

  • Next message: Chris Cogan: "Re: Schutzenberger's Folly, part 1"

    At 04:34 PM 09/16/2000, you wrote:
    >FMAJ1019@aol.com wrote:
    >
    > >ccogan@telepath.com writes:
    > ><< At 12:59 AM 09/16/2000, you wrote:
    > >>http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/evolve_irreducible.html
    > >>
    > >>Scenario #1: reduction of function
    > >>Scenario #2: loss of scaffolding
    > >>Scenario #3: duplication
    >
    > >I would add:
    > >Scenario #4: "sideways" evolution from some other equally complex, but not
    > >*irreducibly* complex, structure.
    >
    >#3, duplication, is all you need to generate masses of parts. Arrays of parts
    >evolve specialized morphology via loss and distortion of parts through RM&NS.
    >Unneeded parts--"scaffolding"--can disappear. What am I missing? Don't tell
    >me IC advocates are unaware that this is part of evolutionary theory.

    Chris
    I think so. By the way, I liked you piece on segmentation, and I think you
    are basically right. Good work.

    >--
    >Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ 415-648-0208 ~ cliff@cab.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 16 2000 - 23:50:59 EDT