"Is 'genetic determinism' empirically valid, and is it essential to the "Modern Synth

To enable and to facilitate is not the same as to cause.

My question is, how can random genetic mutations be the cause of evolution if genes are not the determining cause of traits?If, as modern genomic studies show, 'genes' do not 'cause' traits, (that is, do not compel and determine traits), but only enable and facilitate their development, then how can random genetic mutation be said to be the responsible mechanism for the origins of biological novelty?To enable and to facilitate is not the same as to cause.Mechanisms are compelling causes, not the conditions that enable them to operate.A forest fire is not caused by dry timber, although that does enable one; only a flame from a fire started by a match or a lightning bolt is the direct, immediate and compelling efficient cause. If 'genes' are only the 'dry timber' wrt evolution and development, then what is the 'flame'?

That was my reason for ceasing to respond to you and other particular participants in that thread and others.

Second, the words that you attribute to me by enclosing them in quotation marks ["cannot lead to new traits"] are, in fact, your words, not mine.

It seems that you are reverting to you customary 'debating style' of snide remark, false insinuation, and personal abuse. I'll wait and see if you learn some manners and proper debating protocol before engaging you again.