Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8738 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-28-2017 4:22 AM
416 online now:
kbertsche, PaulK (2 members, 414 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,589 Year: 10,195/21,208 Month: 3,282/2,674 Week: 698/961 Day: 10/150 Hour: 0/3

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Doesn't Natural Selection lead to Specified Complexity?
Posts: 12575
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.4

Message 138 of 138 (702089)
07-01-2013 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Peter
07-01-2013 5:20 AM

Re: Drifting into drift.

At any point in time, k, the genetic makeup of the population is an acculation of the results from the past .... which will include deceased individuals. So maybe I changed tack a bit there, but it's been a while since I even looked at what I was saying here.

Well, that may explain why you aren't making sense. If you don't understand the position you are trying to defend how can you make sensible arguments?

The point you are meant to be explaining is why the effect of selection on the distribution of genes in the current population should be a function of the distribution of genes in the current population, rather than the previous generation. And yet in the case of drift you DO use the previous generation.

Interestingly, this means that if there were no drift, the previous generation would have no relevance to your formula.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Peter, posted 07-01-2013 5:20 AM Peter has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017