Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,248 Year: 5,505/9,624 Month: 530/323 Week: 27/143 Day: 0/17 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Mimicry and neodarwinism
Suspended Member (Idle past 5945 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006

Message 1 of 2 (344621)
08-29-2006 7:00 AM

According Davison there is no doubt, that evolution is a fact, but neodarwinism is incapable to account for it.
I am much impressed by Davisons Evolutionary manifesto - one of the most concise critics of darwinism - which was in turn here very criticized.
In discussions and threads here in EVC lot of opponents claim that Davison cited Grasse and much more older scientists, who are nowadays out of date.
Even there was a remark, that Grasse himself cited some outdated source from 1901!
And yet to cite Darwins teaching from midst of 19 c. is still
up to date and scientifically correct.
It does not matter how old some resource is, because darwinist scientists ignore all facts that do not conform to the neodarwinistic schema. One of these phenomenons are mimicry. Mimetism (or mimicry) was studied very intesive before WW2, yet on
the talkorigins there are no mention of it. Davison cited for instance Punnet, who studied butterflies mimicry and came to the conclusion, that selection is no sufficient explanation to the phenomenon, and to the same conclusion came Heikertinger
(who wrotes plenty books on development of insects and whose corresponding with Erich Wasmann on mimicry was once followed by all biological community in Europe.
But just try to find something more about Heikertinger on internet. Btw, Heikertinger too dismissed darwinian selection, which according him just remove extremities.)
There are plenty of books on mimicry, yet no relaible source of explanation of it.
For instance: there are 14 females distinct morphs of African Mocker Swallowtail, Papilio dardanus (males look identical). Most of these female morphs represent Batesian mimicry
of distasteful species of Danidae and Acraeidae.
Some of them are here:
Batesian mimicry in Papilio dardanus
According to Nijhout (2003) these represents one of the most puzzling cases of evolution in animal world.
What is most interesting is his - Nijhout - darwinian explanation of this phenomenon: big initial mutation and subsequent refinement of these mutations.
"Initial step in the evolution of mimicry is likely to have been due to a genetic effect of large magnitude".
Does not sound this explanation like saltationism, macroevolution?
Page not found | Department of Neurobiology and Behavior
This is very good example, because there is no doubt of same colour patterns on wings of different species of butterfflies and neo-darwinists cannot claims that the likeness is "superficial" (as is the case in the likeness of skeleton (skull) of europian and marsupial wolves mentioned in Manifesto).
There is no mention of Swallowtail on talkorigin and no satisfactory explanation of this phenomenon yet, even though the phenomenon is known and cited more than 130 years!
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.

Inactive Member

Message 2 of 2 (344627)
08-29-2006 7:17 AM

Thread copied to the Mimicry and neodarwinism thread in the Biological Evolution forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024