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

To: El Gato
They would not be abandoning "natural selection", just looking at the method by which it operates. That is more or less continuously, or in "punctuated equilibrium" manner. This issue is hardly new. In fact I'd thought that the "fits and starts" model was more in favor. I know it is with me.

It didn't used to be with me, but I'm coming around. I heard a great deal about genetic drift in my evolution classes....and yet we have the coelecanth. What happened there? Sure, maybe there was no overt environmental selection pressure, but oughtn't there be at least some random drift in such a small population--and over the time frames we are talking about it, wouldn't it have been enough to cause some serious anatomical changes?

I dunno. Too many groups in too much stasis over too great a time. Like you said, fits and starts. Not many smooth flows.

32 posted on 12/10/2009 11:55:01 AM PST by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Claud
It didn't used to be with me, but I'm coming around. I heard a great deal about genetic drift in my evolution classes....and yet we have the coelecanth. What happened there? Sure, maybe there was no overt environmental selection pressure, but oughtn't there be at least some random drift in such a small population--and over the time frames we are talking about it, wouldn't it have been enough to cause some serious anatomical changes?

I dunno. Too many groups in too much stasis over too great a time. Like you said, fits and starts. Not many smooth flows.

No matter how you slice it, there are issues with the ToE that just strain its credibility.

34 posted on 12/10/2009 1:11:37 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | 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