Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3902RE: [DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM] Fossil Gaps 8

Expand Messages
  • Dave Oldridge
    Jul 31, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      From: DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of pahu81
      Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:58 PM
      To: DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [DEBUNKINGEVOLUTIONISM] Fossil Gaps 8








      Fossil Gaps 8



      Gould and Eldredge claimed transitional fossils are missing because
      relatively rapid evolutionary jumps (which they called punctuated
      equilibria) occurred over these gaps. They did not explain how this could
      happen.

      Actually, they did. I will be happy to explain if anyone in here is
      actually willing to think about it. In fact, Darwin almost came up with PE
      himself.

      Many geneticists are shocked by the proposal of Gould and Eldredge. Why
      would they propose something so contradictory to genetics? Gould and
      Eldredge were forced to say that evolution must proceed in jumps. Never
      explained, in genetic and mathematical terms, is how such large jumps could
      occur. To some, this desperation is justified.

      The simple answer is that there really are no LARGE jumps, just a lot of
      rapid ones that, unless the fossil record is fine enough, simply do not get
      recorded. Gould pointed this out and actually gave an example or two. Just
      how is PE contradictory to genetics? This looks like a typical straw man
      fallacy to me.

      Let's look at it logically. If a species is well-adapted to its
      environment, then any mutation in that species is likely to be detrimental.
      Thus well-adapted species tend to remain stable for longish periods. But
      environments change and species migrate. Thus there is no guarantee that a
      species will remain well-adapted for ever. Indeed, the facts show that this
      is very unlikely to happen. When a species is poorly-adapted to the
      environment in which it finds itself, then the likelihood of a mutation
      occurring that favours better reproductive success is much higher than in a
      well-adapted species. Poorly-adapted species, therefore, evolve much faster
      than well-adapted ones and the accumulation of changes is often too fast to
      be encapsulated in stone at normal fossilization rates. This is what is
      OBSERVED.

      Your alleged desperation is not, therefore, justified at all. Perhaps
      getting science from biased sources has narrowed your vision..



      --



      Dave Oldridge







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic