Discovery Institute loses one

May I suggest that this question: ...should use the word "diversity" instead of "complexity"?It seems to me that more than often the concept of the complexity of life is brought up in connection to abiogenesis, and not just evolution.

If that's the case, then saying "evolution" instead of "random mutation and natural selection" might also cause a problem, since many would probably contend that things like sexual selection should get to have a say into issues of diversity and/or complexity as well.Trying to "finess the distinction" in this would probably prove interesting as well.

Ah. But isn't it up to the finessing to find out how many do consider it so? Added by Edit:
I don't remember where, but I'm quite certain I've seen it mentioned as a mechanism in its own right in at least a few different places. You and I might not agree (I'm not quite sure myself since I haven't grasped the subject completely) but that's beyond the point, no?This message has been edited by Maxwell's Demon, 08-29-2005 09:31 PMThis message has been edited by Maxwell's Demon, 08-29-2005 09:32 PM

Thanks. I actually read it just minutes after making my post. As I was typing it I figured this would be good place to find a thread on the subject. I guess it all comes down to what you consider as natural selection (NS). If it is selection by nature (which seems reasonable) then sexual selection (SS) should be included in NS.
But I could also easily imagine that to some SS could be seen as a force driving to speed NS up by having the individuals chose those mates who not only survive long enough to have offspring, but tend to have offspring that will in themselves survive.
That is, SS sees one step further than NS.(Off topic: I just realised it's "beside the point". Or does "beyond the point" work too?)