Susan Brassfield wrote:
>>Wow, a real Darwinian. Huxley's warning against this gradualist absolutism
>>wasn't heeded by Darwin and isn't heeded by you.
>
>Obviously I didn't make myself very clear. Even very rapid evolution is
>glacial compared the the span of a human lifetime. "Rapid" can mean 1000
>years.
To me the question is, what can be accomplished in one mutation,
in one generation, one evolutionary step? Steady microevolution might
produce geologically instantaneous large changes through Darwin's
"insensible" gradations, but that is not proof that macromutations
did not occur. Plus there are serious mechanical problems in doing
certain things gradually, as I outlined in my comments about skeletal
elaboration, where I pointed out that articulated bones are intrinsically
discontinuous.
>>How do you explain the origin of cellular complexity, without the
>>macroevolutionary step of symbionts becoming genomically integrated?
>
>gosh, if I had the slightest idea what you are talking about I might answer
>that question.
I was thinking of the not-so-new theory of cellular evolution through
the integration of free organisms into one functioning cell. I'm sure
you've heard of Lynn Margulis.
I'm trying to save evolutionary theory, you're making it look silly
by insisting on impossibilities and brushing aside objections in
defense of a model that was ridiculed by T.H. Huxley from the start.
--Cliff Lundberg ~ San Francisco ~ 415-648-0208 ~ cliff@cab.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 19 2000 - 15:06:42 EDT