Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Side Orders ⇒ Free For All ⇒

Is Syamsu a creationist or an evolutionist?

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Syamsu a creationist or an evolutionist?
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 124 of 192 (63140)
10-28-2003 2:31 PM 		Reply to: Message 120 by Syamsu
10-28-2003 9:08 AM

Again, my point is that the mutations are not really random if you say the variations provided by mutation are for contributing to reproduction when the environment changes
​
When exactly did someone say the are *for* contributing to reproduction. There are many mutations floating around in any population. Some may then become advantages under some enviromental changes. NONE of them were FOR anything. With hindsight we may see that some of them are "good" and others not good.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Syamsu, posted 10-28-2003 9:08 AM Syamsu has not replied
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 136 of 192 (63295)
10-29-2003 9:55 AM 		Reply to: Message 134 by Syamsu
10-29-2003 9:05 AM

I did not mean to say that there is no variation present, I just meant to say that mostly variation disappears without contributing to reproduction.
I don't think there is any argument with this.
​
That you describe the variation that is present as a resource that just incidentally can contribute to reproduction when the environment changes basicly says that the variation is not random.
Why would you conclude that? The variation is random some of it happens to contribute to reproduction, some doesn't. That is happens to contribute to reproduction later doesn't mean it was any less random in how it occured.
​
If it were random we should assume that variants can't deal with differing environments, because there are so many more possible variations that can't contribute to reproduction even if the environment changes, compared to variations that might contribute
​
Why? There may be a lot of variations which don't contribute but that doesn't mean there can't be some that do?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Syamsu, posted 10-29-2003 9:05 AM Syamsu has not replied
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 157 of 192 (64308)
11-04-2003 1:38 AM 		Reply to: Message 156 by Syamsu
11-03-2003 11:14 PM

I don't get this sentence:
"The population has not changed Mark, it has split into separate niches"
​
The population hasn't changed but it has split? Isn't a split a change?
​
There was one kind of population there and now there are two and this isn't a change?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Syamsu, posted 11-03-2003 11:14 PM Syamsu has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by Syamsu, posted 11-04-2003 4:53 AM NosyNed has replied
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 159 of 192 (64369)
11-04-2003 11:14 AM 		Reply to: Message 158 by Syamsu
11-04-2003 4:53 AM

So you are suggesting that every time there is any genetic change that produces a phenotype change it is a separate population?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Syamsu, posted 11-04-2003 4:53 AM Syamsu has not replied
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024