Peter & Rosemary Grant, Darwin's Finches and Evolution

Hey, Faith, you remember how you were proved completely wrong about genetics?I hardly see any point in you making the same mistakes again. Not in front of the same audience. It was funny the first time, now it's just boring.

In the thread I linked to, I gave six observed examples of new varieties being produced in the way you say can't happen. By contrast you gave no examples of new varieties being produced in the way you say must happen, preferring to produce a lot of words and no actual evidence. You are still producing words purporting to prove that what we can see happening can't happen. But it can, and we can watch.

Do you really not know how to do this? Faith, it does not require a "ploy" to confuse you. You have a poor memory. I instanced six breeds of cat: the American Curl, the Scottish Fold, the American Wirehair, the LaPerm, the Selkirk Rex and the Munchkin. In each case the variety is recent and the distinguishing trait of the variety was dominant, and so it was possible to pinpoint the exact time and place of origin of each breed and to trace its history. See posts #267, #272, #282, #287 of that thread.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

So we can imagine that in the future people might reduce the diversity of the breed. But unless they do so by making them all clones of one another, the diversity of the breed will still have undergone a net increase from the point at which it consisted of only one cat.As to whether the process I've described is completely different from normal, I would point out that I've produced six instances of it happening, and you've produced no instances of a breed being produced the way you say must always happen. And yet despite the words you have written, the six breeds I've instanced have in fact increased in diversity. It's almost as if your words don't magically make facts disappear.

Thank you. I've edited it.

But Faith, these are recognized breeds. For example the Cat Fanciers Association calls the American Curl a breed. The International Cat Association calls it a breed. How do you think I found all these examples in the first place? I looked at lists of cat breeds.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Hey, you remember we can see what actually happens? Since it's the exact opposite of what your reasoning tells you must happen, this rather suggests that there's a flaw in your reasoning.

He was talking about genetic diversity. That's why he wrote: "Let's suppose in the wild, a mutation gives a wolf a curly ear ..."You may have set a new personal record for how quickly you can get to a risible misunderstanding of the point under discussion. The mistake was in the seventh word of your post. But I'm sure you can do better.

Well, first you could admit that you were wrong. Then you could move on to learning the difference between "playing semantic games" and "speaking the English language". And then you could try a little harder not to be wrong about things in general.

Yeah, your point is that you're right. And I completely missed the point by proving that you're wrong.

Unless mutation exists. Oh look, it does. So, consider the following scenario. A species is homozygous for traits A and B. A breeding pair of the species is marooned on an island by a freak wind. Some years later, an allele A^* arises in the new population and replaces A. Then an allele B^* arises in the new population and replaces B. The parent population continues as it was. Now if zygotes with the alleles A and B^* are inviable, then by definition the new population is a new species (if not it is at least a new variety).Note that the clade has undergone a net increase in genetic diversity and that neither species has undergone a net reduction in genetic diversity.Now there are two points in this process where the daughter group loses genetic diversity --- where it goes from a mixed A/A^* to an all A^* population, and then again where it goes from a mixed B/B^* to an all B^*. But there is no net loss of diversity in either species.

See my previous post.

In the first place, you seem to have missed the bit where I wrote: "an allele A* arises in the new population and replaces A." Please write a new post the stupidity of which relies entirely on your ignorance of genetics and not on your inability to comprehend simple sentences written in the English language. Thank you.

No. A^* and B^* replace A and B (respectively) throughout the population by either genetic drift or natural selection, it doesn't matter which.Now, if B^* and A are incompatible, producing inviable zygotes, then the A^*, B^* population cannot interbreed with the A, B population, and so we have a new species. And yet none of the events described lead to a net loss of genetic diversity in either group.