Essential Links ▼
Message Coding Help ►
Posts of the Month ►
Document Library ►
If so, doesn't the prevailing view imply that random mutations that are NOT seriously damaging to the chance of reproduction get retained?
If that is true, then doesn't the prevailing view predict that random mutations that may be useful in the future but not useful at the moment also do not get filtered out?
In that case, how does the FL model differ? How can you determine is something was intentional or just **** luck?
And your point?
In case you missed the significant question, here it is yet again.
How can you determine is something was intentional or just **** luck?
I mean it's obvious that the trend of evolution will be towards greater complexity but beyond that, is there anything that seems inevitable?
Which of course is totally irrelevant to this topic even though it is directly predicted by conventional Evolution Theories.
No more than the fact that the water fills the hole implies that the hole was necessary for the water. The only thing implied is that ubiquitin was just good enough to work.
But there is evidence of the existence of accidents while no one has ever presented any evidence of the existence of the front-loaders.
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.0 BetaInnovative software from Qwixotic © 2020