At 12:48 PM 12/13/98 -0800, Pim wrote:
>
>Art: Now this sounds like an evolution I could believe in! If evolution
"does not move toward a more perfect state nor even toward greater
complexity", then it must either do nothing, or move toward a less perfect
state and toward lesser complexity. I could buy into that.
>
>The issue is that evolution does not require to move towards greater
complexity, nor a more "perfect state". I am glad that you accept
evolution. Perhaps rather than making up strawmen arguments about
>what evolution isn't, should one not focus on what it is ? Of course that
would mean having to deal with a topic somewhat uncomfortable to some.
Art: I agree, there are many, both evolutionists and creationists who are
uncomfortable with modern evolutionary theory. I am not uncomfortable at
all with the above, and I am eagerly anticipating the examples (I would
think that biologists will not be satisfied with only one any longer) that
will replace the peppered moth in the textbooks.
beak of the finch. Another great example was the colorfulness of fish and predation.
ArtL lots of other examples such as the observed changes in the Galapagos
Finches, but do we really know any more about those putative changes than
we do about the Peppered Moth?
We surely have a far better scenario here in which the islands and the measurements
made for a great experimental area.
Perhaps it is time for some doubters to realize that the peppered moth is but one of
many examples of natural selection. It's too bad that some have considered the fact
that science corrected itself wrt the peppered moth as some evidence of weakness in
the theory of evolution.