Natural Limitation to Evolutionary Processes (2/14/05)

Define 'top level'???We are the species that are the most technological, yes, but does that mean 'top level'??It has not been established that either techology or intelligence is a good long term survivial technique. After all, our species has only been around less that 200,000 years, and our technology has only been about 12,000 years or so.The cockroach seems to be much more robust in surviviablity.

Ok.. You have admited that "KIND" is a term that means the same things as 'species'.The fact that one species gives rise to another species (or two), or that two populations of the same species, for what ever reason, no longer interbreeds, and have enough variation between the two to no longer able to interbreed, that is evolution.Congraduations, you have just started accepting evolution.

Define "Lower scale". That is not a biological term, nor is it used by evolution.

You are making a couple of mistakes in your reasoning. 1) most mutations are 'neutral' . 2) Unless there is some survival reason for a genetic disease, it tends to become less over time. For example, the gene for diabeties. You would think that it would get less as generations went by, but they found that when one parent had that gene, and the other didn't, there was a bigger perceptange of children born with the gene than expected. Since most pregnancies end in miscarriage, the conclusion that can be drawn from this is that the gene that might cause health problems later in life gave a survival characteristic to a fetus in the womb. There were less spontanous miscarrages with fetus's that carried the gene than did not.You are also ignoring the filtering of natural selection. "bad" mutations are more likely to be 'filtered' out than neutral or "good" mutations.As for the 'things are getting worse' senerio from the creationsist... there is no objective evidence for it.

Well, since it is true, you do not understand the process. Most mutations do not produce either an advantage or disadvantage, it is for the most part, merely a change. Some of these genes don't provide an advantage or disadvanate in the current environment, but MIGHT, if the environment changes. If it is a 'change in alle', it might or might not be destructive. ALl it means is that the duplication process of the gene when the egg/sperm was created was imperfect. If it is not benefictial,the gene gets filtered out via natural selection. Many of these changes seem to stop the organism from forming in embryo form (did you know that 75% of all human pregnancies end in miscarrage , mostly during the first month?As for the tend for things 'gettings worse'. I havent' seen ANY evidence for it being true at all. I have seen examples of beneficial mutations .. such as delta 26, and the HDL cholestrol gene of that sicilian family.

The reason is that due to the fact that modern jaws are relatively smaller than they were in earlier times. Therefore, the jawbone does not have enough room in many modern jawbones. THis , in turn, causes more dental problems because of crowding.