RE: Intelligent design type evolution vs naturalism type evolution.
April 6, 2013 at 1:02 pm
(This post was last modified: April 6, 2013 at 1:05 pm by Mystic.)
(April 6, 2013 at 12:57 pm)Rhythm Wrote: It doesn't have to, it needs only be non-deleterious.
How would the mutation gain popularity as opposed to the non-mutation in the population, to then gain, another mutation, that add towards that direction? You keep getting a series of mutations that make head towards point B, but it's not advantageous at all, all these mutations along the way?
(April 6, 2013 at 12:57 pm)Rhythm Wrote: It doesn't have to, it needs only be non-deleterious.
Think of it this way Mystic. Perhaps right now, this very moment, you possess a mutation that makes you effectively immune to a pandemic disease that has not yet shown up. This mutation isn't doing anything for you right now, but it;s not killing you. If that disease never shows up, we'll never have a phenomenal record of it's existence. But if it does, the mutation will have become what we call an "adaptation"...and when all of the rest of the males die from dick drop off disease (as it will come to be called) then you and your genetics will become very well represented in the surviving population.
If, on the other hand, the disease never shows up, but you continue to pass along this mutation - and it continues to change, there may be a moment in which that mutation has a beneficial effect entirely removed from the resistance to disease it conferred...perhaps it makes you entirely more virile...and here again, your genetics will be very well represented in the surviving population.
But in this case,that mutation is favoured by natural selection, it gains popularity due to natural selection.
