Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (8950 total)
40 online now:
DrJones*, Faith, Percy (Admin) (3 members, 37 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,364 Year: 22,400/19,786 Month: 963/1,834 Week: 33/430 Day: 33/63 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does the history of life require "macroevolution"?
Stile
Member
Posts: 3863
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 27 of 127 (812069)
06-14-2017 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Faith
06-13-2017 9:16 PM


Faith writes:

You can get lots of variation and lots of new species from mere splits in the population, but eventually enough evolution in one direction will lead to the condition of depleted genetic diversity from which further evolution is impossible. Evolution defeats evolution. You can never get anything but variations on a species, never a truly new species.

If your description of evolution was correct... then your conclusion would also be correct.

However, your description of evolution is not correct.
It's not really "wrong" though... just more "incomplete."

Your description of evolution does accurately (enough) describe a very small subset of evolution and how some very small specifics actually work.
And if that was the only way evolution worked... you would be correct and your conclusion would, again, also be correct.

But it is, in fact, only a very small subset. There are many, many other ways evolution works. Most of those other ways include an increase in genetic information (from mutations) along the way.

In fact, even the specific subset you describe includes mutations and a resulting increase in genetic information. It's just that the specific subset you describe 'evolves' faster than the mutation rate generally has to increase the genetic information by any significant amount. And you still end up with the 'net loss of genetic information' in the small area you're describing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 9:16 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 3863
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 28 of 127 (812070)
06-14-2017 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Faith
06-14-2017 3:03 PM


Re: Simple Example
Faith writes:

Mutations are not necessary for evolution.

That is true.

It is also true that mutations are an extremely large part of evolution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 06-14-2017 3:03 PM Faith 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 © 2019