From: Terry M. Gray (grayt@lamar.colostate.edu)
Date: Wed Aug 13 2003 - 16:26:43 EDT
Brian,
Interesting twist here. I've always been inclined to say that
"fine-tuning" as you call it is the product of natural selection. The
origin of the adaptation may come by a variety of means more than
likely not involving natural selection. Of course, that's just
another way of saying that natural selection acts on variation
(however it arises).
TG
>At 11:18 AM 8/13/2003 -0400, Walter Hicks wrote:
>>I agree that all of these (and ones offered by Terry) affect
>>evolution, but I don't see most of them as alternatives to natural
>>selection. For the most part they introduce variation and then
>>natural selection filters out the ones that are not useful for
>>survival. Catastrophic changes are an exception and certainly would
>>represent a non-"Darwinian" effect.
>
>I think you raise an interesting question. Let me try
>rephrasing it, hopefully without destroying your intent.
>
>Suppose we limit ourselves to the most "interesting"
>results of evolution. Things that Dawkins would say
>appear to have been designed for a purpose. Or,
>better stated, adaptations. Cases where there seems
>to be a fine-tuning between form and function.
>
>Are there any scientific explanations for adaptations
>other than natural selection?
>
>Brian Harper
-- _________________ Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist Chemistry Department, Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 grayt@lamar.colostate.edu http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/ phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Aug 13 2003 - 16:25:37 EDT