Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9021 total)
44 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1 (2 members, 42 visitors)
Newest Member: Ashles
Post Volume: Total: 882,630 Year: 276/14,102 Month: 276/294 Week: 32/136 Day: 32/27 Hour: 0/1

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   How is Natural selection a mechanism?
Posts: 16670
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.7

Message 26 of 191 (525549)
09-23-2009 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Kevin123
09-23-2009 4:09 PM

Re: Mutating genes
I don't think that one beneficial mutation per 1,000,000 matings is terribly wrong - it certainly isn't the worst mistake in your calculation. Unfortunately when you came to use it, you used one beneficial mutation per 1,000,000 generations which is very different. Then you made an even worse mistake by insisting that it was necessary to get 50 beneficial mutations in consecutive matings - I can't imagine why. YOur calculation was not even meaningful.


BTW is anybody else curious why physicists are much more open to the possibility that Einstein made mistakes than evolutionists are about Darwin?

You're wrong about that. Darwin's explanation of heredity was dead wrong, for instance, and it isn't talked about BECAUSE it is dead wrong. Steven Jay Gould quite often criticised Darwin (and it seems that the criticisms were not even entirely accurate !). If there are equivalent criticisms of Einstein, I'm not aware of them. And of course, nobody has problems with adding to Darwin's theories - he's no taken as the last word at all.

The problem is not that Darwin is above criticism - the problem is that the criticisms are WRONG.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Kevin123, posted 09-23-2009 4:09 PM Kevin123 has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021