Re: Natural selection and favorable traits how were they measured ?

On Jan 22, 5:33 pm, backspace <sawireless2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 22, 7:17 pm, hersheyh <hershe...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Jan 22, 9:26 am, backspace <sawireless2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Friar Broccoli wrote:
If it is, I won't argue the point. I believe in NS and believe
the evidence points strongly in favour of NS, but I know I
cannot prove that God does not sometimes intervene in the
process.
Do you think that you and I disagree on some substantive
point?

Let me ask you the following which is my answer to you:

What is the true meaning of the following:
1) Survival of the fittest. (Note that I never said SoF is a
tautology.)

Taken literally, not much. Better would be "survival of the
fitter" (reproductive success is relative to the success of others,
not absolute -- there is no 'fittest' in an absolute sense, only
fitter in a conditional and relative sense). Better yet would be
"greater differential reproductive success due to better phenotypic

<snip nonsense>

If a cow were meant to produce beer instead of milk would it still be
a success ?

Success to whom? And 'meant to produce beer' by whom? Obviously,
domesticated cows are "intelligently designed" or, if you prefer,
"eugenically produced" by humans to meet human needs and not the needs
of the cows themselves. That is, cows are examples of "intelligent
design" by "intelligent designers" who want to force cattle into
creatures that only exist to serve its needs. Just like some
"intelligent agent" who supposedly "intelligently designed" humans to
serve only to worship him. No wonder religious imagery in
Christianity is filled with images of "sheep". We all know what
happens to sheep. They get fleeced and then get led to slaughter.

Do the cows that produce beer have greater reproductive success
relative to the ones that produce milk? That is, of course, an
empirically determinable question (one answered by actual
experiment). It is not an empty philosophical or lexicographical
problem determined by blithering idiots who want magical words.

And, if the answer to this empirically determinable question were
"Yes, the beer-producers have more offspring relative to the milk-
producers (that is the metric of 'success').", then the answer is that
those cows that produce beer are 'fitter' than the milk-producers. If
the answer were "No, they have fewer offspring (assuming that they
survive to reproduce themselves).", then the answer is that the beer-
producers are less fit than the milk producers. If the answer were,
"There is no significant difference wrt reproductive success between
the milk producers and the beer producers", then the traits are
selectively neutral and the frequency of the traits will drift to
fixation one way or the other, with a probability determined by the
current frequency. Assuming, of course, that the local environment
remains constant (selective value is contingent and not absolute).

.

Relevant Pages