RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 12, 2014 at 10:31 am
(This post was last modified: September 12, 2014 at 10:35 am by Chas.)
(September 12, 2014 at 2:49 am)Zidneya Wrote: Isn't this info at most alters the way we understand evolution but it doesn't refutes the theory itself?
How does this refutes evolution? Because I always thought that evolution was the constant adaptation of organisms trough sequential changes inherited by their progenitors in order to maintain the survival of the species.
Except that is not accurate. Organisms do not adapt and survival of the species is not a part of the algorithm of evolution, only a result.
Evolution is change in allele frequencies in populations due to differential reproduction. Genes that contribute to organisms surviving to reproduce are retained in the gene pool and tend to become more common.
Individual organisms do not adapt - they survive or they die. No organism (except possibly humans) is the least bit concerned with 'survival of the species'.
Quote:And if you think this carefully when you say:
evidence that gene expression is dynamic and influenced by all aspects of the environment.
That doesn't sound like it refutes evolution but that it supports it instead. So shouldn't you rephrase your question of: Is evolution actually true? to: Do we really understand how evolution works?
No, she is quibbling about mechanisms.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.