Wright et al. on the Process of Mutation

They're not precise synonyms, but they're based upon the same principle, and random mutations have the same effect on both. A random mutation that is deleterious with respect to fitness is also deleterious with respect to "life's preservation." Same for beneficial mutations. If you don't think this is true then name a random mutation that would be beneficial for one and deleterious for the other. You're forgetting selection again. Life produces many offspring, they compete for limited resources, the best succeed in contributing offspring to the next generation. Life that by the luck of the draw possess beneficial mutations will contribute more offspring to the next generation, and gradually those beneficial mutations will spread throughout the population. Life has the ability to adapt to changing environments through the processes of mutation and natural selection.Is this discussion about whether evolution is random related to the topic?--Percy

Hi Zi Ko,What we've been saying is that mutations are random with respect to adaptation. Natural selection, which resists the propagation of ill-adaptive mutations, is not random with respect to adaptation.But now you've dropped into declarative mode and aren't even pretending to be interested in the
topic. Discussion of neural systems and information should have its own thread. I see that your thread proposal from 12/16 hasn't drawn a moderator response yet, so I'll look at it now.--Percy

No. With random mutations, beneficial mutations are far outnumbered by those that are neutral or deleterious. In the absence of selection deleterious mutations would accumulate and reduce adaptation, the opposite of what you have chosen to call "preserving life."Selection weeds out deleterious mutation and favors beneficial mutations, with the result that beneficial mutations tend to be preserved and spread throughout a population.Without random mutation, selection would have no beneficial mutations to select.Without selection, deleterious mutations would not be removed from a population. You have no evidence of the processes you claim exist, yet you want evidence that they don't exist? Do you also want evidence that unicorns don't exist?--Percy

You've examined mutations in fossils? Wow! The changes in finch beaks in the Galapagos are not thought to be due to new mutations as far as we know. The expectation is that they're due to changing allele frequencies in certain genes. You can read a brief summary of the causes of finch beak changes at Molecular basis of beak evolution at Wikipedia. The cause of the changes in timing of development that affect beak size don't seem to have been tracked down to specific alleles.But you've seem to have left out the issue I was addressing. You stated your belief that random mutations and selection both tend to preserve life. This is incorrect. Random mutations if allowed to spread unchecked will worsen adaptation. But random mutations filtered by natural selection so as to remove those that are ill-adaptive improves adaptation, or using your preferred term, "preserves life."--PercyEdited by Percy, : Slight clarification.

Gould and others examined mutations in fossils? Wow!Zi Ko, think a little bit about this. With rare exceptions, fossils contain no organic material. DNA is organic. There is no DNA in fossils.You still do not seem to understand that mutation and natural selection pull in different directions regarding with you call "life preservation," and I would have thought this would have prevented you from making a clear statement relative about Wright and Shapiro, and yet you successfully pull it off in Message 267: Yes, you are right that this is what Shapiro and Wright appear to be saying, but as has been pointed out many times, they greatly exaggerate.--Percy

Since you haven't edited your original message, what you actually said is still there in Message 262: Hence the comment, "You've examined mutations in fossils? Wow!"With only rare exceptions fossils do not contain organic material. You cannot cite the lack of intermediate fossils as an example of guided mutations because there are no mutations to examine.In the future I suggest that if you're going to selectively quote mine your own posts that you edit them first so you don't get caught. --Percy