SEXUAL SELECTION ~ not 'natural selection' per se ~ whatever demigod that might be. Currently all the fanciful stories are on hold while real science tries to figure out what epigenetics is up to.
Lest someone else think I said something I did not say, here's the money quote:
"I think sexual selection has been pretty well debunked with the discovery that breast size, hair thickness and number of sweat glands and shape of teeth are under the control of a single gene"
posted on 03/15/2013 10:01:40 AM PDT
Okay, sexual selection it is that you push aside. Seems integral to the whole theory to me. Natural selection directs will to survive as sexual selection drives the need to reproduce. Proper selection is vital for both, or they fail. You appear to be saying so long as one mate can find another of its kind any will do. But that is not what is observed in nature. It doesn't make sense on the face of it.
posted on 03/15/2013 10:40:59 AM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson