As Robert Broom died in 1951, thus being unavailable for comment, I suggest the onus is on those who claim Broom was "anti-Darwinian" to find some reference in his writings that supports that assertion. Does not the fact that such evidence is not apparent, make it equally possible that Broom accepted mainstream Darwinian evolution?
What has the colour of fungal fruiting bodies have to do with whether Robert Broom believed and/or was right to believe that evolution of mammals is finished?
I am getting the feeling that you think evolution's "goal" was to create humankind in the image of god. I think there are theistic evolutionists that believe this, but this is a philosophical viewpoint that science does not address.
quote:You seem to be pretty nervous from mushroom coloration.
It seems reasonable that those poisonous fruiting bodies that were easier to identify as such would have more chance of spreading spores and thus over time the genes for "warning colour" would dominate in the particular species. It also seems reasonable that species with palatable fruiting bodies could be colour selected, as those with mutations causing similar colours to genuinely poisonous ones are likely to be avoided by predators using visual clues.
quote:You are right that topic is animal evolution.
Are you still claiming that Davison's front-loading hypothesis and that "the environment had nothing to do with it" etc. is a better explanation than modern evolutionary theory?
quote:Zebras and swans coloration is another topic. My point is that coloration in 99% of animals has no selective advantage/disadvantage.
Selection has costs and benefits. Pigment production has a cost element. Organisms that have become adapted to a cave environment lack pigmentation, and thus save the energy in making it.
quote:Mushrooms are very good example that can be perhaps extrapolated to mammalian kingdom very well. Palatable, unpalatable and poisonous mushrooms are very colorful. Without any neodarwinistic explanation as far as I know - we should check such explanation much more easier btw. It's not so easy I suppose to use darwinistic dialectic wit here as it is in the case of mammalian coloration that nobody can verify.