Re: Evolution required by imperfect and differential replication

Perplexed in Peoria wrote:

"John Harshman" <jharshman.diespamdie@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:MtY7j.5189$NY.1089@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Perplexed in Peoria wrote:


"chip" <trico@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Xns9A0487CC36BC1tricoablcom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


That's all! If things replicate imperfectly and some do not replicate, then
given lots of iterations, evolution happens! With enough selection pressure
and iterations, there is no limit on how much change can accumulate. Not
accepting this is just beating-head-against-wall stupid.


Well, it takes a little more than that. First, it is necessary that a part of
the differerential reduction be caused by something that can be inherited.

No it isn't. Drift, eh?


Well, ok. But I notice you weren't addressing drift either in your other
reply.

Not explictly, but I was describing a scenario where evolution wouldn't
happen, and so had to eliminate drift by declaring all sites to be under
selection.

I suppose that for drift, what you need is something inheritable which is
correlated with the differential reproduction - noticing, of course, that
correlation does not imply causation. Furthermore, the correlation can
be a short-term and spurious correlation caused by 'sampling variance'
in a finite population. It need not persist long term.

Right.

And it also requires that the imperfect replication is always finding
new and 'creative' ways to tweak the genome.

Not sure what this part means. You can have evolution even if the same
old mutations keep happening over and over.

It will eventually run out of steam, though, if the environment is constant.
You made the same point yourself, in your other response.

Yes, if.

A lot of creationists
find something to be suspicious of in all the 'fine print'. The suspicion
is reasonable. The inability or unwillingness to move past the suspicion
upon further study may well be pretty stupid.




.

Loading