quote:
Originally posted by Conspirator:
I understand Haldane's Dilemma, so go ahead and post it. I'll understand what you're saying.
The very first thing to discuss, then, is why is it a 'dilemma'? Apparently, it was labelled a 'dilemma' (not by Haldane, by the way) because, I would imagine, it was believed that some huge number of mutational differences must be required to account for observed phenotypic differences. Actual observation and nucleotide sequence data, as well as experimental observation, indicates that this is not the case, especially if the mutants are developmental genes or genes that influence development.
The 'dilemma', as proselytized by anti-evolutionists, is that there is not enough time for enough fixed, beneficial mutations to have accumulated to account for human evolution from an ape-like ancestor.
This immediately raises some questions, which the purveyors of the 'dilemma' (namely, ReMine and any lay creationist that ha sread his egomaniacal gibberish) avoid at all costs.
1. How many mutations
are or
would be required to account for human evolution from an ape-like ancestor (ReMine alludes to over 500,000, yet does not at any point offer any sort of substantiation. Apparently, it is just his engineering opinion)?
2. What WAS the ape-like ancestor from which humans evolved? (without this knowledge, there is no way at all that any 'minimum number' can be determined. So please, divulge this information. ReMine and his followers refuse to even address such questions maybe you can?
After you address those, we can move on.
quote:
And as for what I think a transitional would look like... This is taken from Denton's book which is also from Harwood's site.
I asked what YOUR definition/criteria of a transitional is. Not only did your quote
not provide an answer, it tells me nothing about what objective criteria you have in mind.
Please try again.