Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Stultis

"I don't think you understand what "co-evolution" means. It has nothing whatever to do with the inheritance of acquired characteristics, or even (directly) with inheritance at all."

You're missing the point. If co-evolution is happening within a hundred years, it must be Lamarckian, because otherwise the "random mutation" part would not have time to catch up.

"It simply means that two species have strong and mutual environmental impacts on each other, such that if one species evolves some new or improved capability, the other will be under an immediate selective pressure to respond in some way, and so their evolution is linked by a feedback loop via natural selection."

Exactly, but if this process can happen within a measley few generations, then the adaption process is not random in order for evolution to occur at that pace.


893 posted on 12/30/2005 1:32:32 PM PST by johnnyb_61820
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 886 | View Replies ]


To: johnnyb_61820; Stultis
"You're missing the point. If co-evolution is happening within a hundred years, it must be Lamarckian, because otherwise the "random mutation" part would not have time to catch up.

Stultis, you want to take this, or do you want me to?

928 posted on 12/30/2005 4:38:36 PM PST by b_sharp (Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 893 | View Replies ]

To: johnnyb_61820; b_sharp
You're missing the point. If co-evolution is happening within a hundred years, it must be Lamarckian, because otherwise the "random mutation" part would not have time to catch up.

You don't usually need to wait on random mutation. Most populations maintain a significant amount of variation at any one time, and thus can respond, often on time scales of a few years or less, to sufficiently extreme selective pressures. See, for instance, the book The Beak of the Finch which discusses documented, and nearly instantaneous, selective responses to droughts in the Galapagos Islands. (I.e. the results of the droughts were such that the sizes and natures of seeds available to the birds shifted significantly, and so did the average beak sizes. There was already a range of available beak sizes in the population, so differential survival rapidly shifted the average or typical beak size.)

941 posted on 12/30/2005 7:41:52 PM PST by Stultis (I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 893 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson