Re: Testing Evolution Via Genetic Drift.
From: Tim Tyler (tim_at_tt1lock.org)
Date: 09/21/04
- Next message: John Edser: "Self-Organization of Complex Systems"
- Previous message: John Edser: "Re: Replicating What?"
- In reply to: John Edser: "Testing Evolution Via Genetic Drift."
- Next in thread: John Edser: "Re: Testing Evolution Via Genetic Drift."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:34:55 +0000 (UTC)
John Edser <edser@tpg.com.au> wrote or quoted:
> Tim Tyler <tim@tt1lock.org> wrote:
> > TT:_
> > It sounds as though we all agree that drift has specific
> > effects on the population.
[...]
> > TT:-
> > It acts to cause undirected -
> > and most likely in the long term deleterious - changes in
> > the population.
>
> JE:-
> Therefore, I see no _rational_ argument that
> can allow drift, which can only "cause undirected -
> and most likely in the long term deleterious -
> changes in the population" to cause evolution, yet
> this remains the Neo Darwinistic position in 2004.
That's a simple matter of definitions:
Evolution is normally *defined* to be genetic change
in a population.
*Even* deleterious changes fit into that definition.
You might have your own definition of evolution -
but with the /conventional/ definition there can be
no doubt that random changes due to forces such as
cosmic rays can reach fixation in small populations
(i.e. genetic drift) and can cause genetic change
in the population - and thus evolution.
-- __________ |im |yler http://timtyler.org/ tim@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
- Next message: John Edser: "Self-Organization of Complex Systems"
- Previous message: John Edser: "Re: Replicating What?"
- In reply to: John Edser: "Testing Evolution Via Genetic Drift."
- Next in thread: John Edser: "Re: Testing Evolution Via Genetic Drift."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
