>SB>Wesley was talking about isolating natural selection from drift and my
> >understanding was that he was talking about populations over a large amount
> >of time.
Stephen:
>Why does Susan think that Wesley *needs* to see "natural selection" in
>"populations over a large amount of time"?
I'm sorry, since you (mis)quoted Wesley originally, I thought you had been
following his conversation.
>SB>You see natural selection every time you spray for roaches or
> >don't take all your antibiotics.
>
>I would have no problem with this if it *was* natural `selection', i.e.
>differential survival and reproduction.
>
>But as a matter of interest how does Susan *see* "natural selection
>*every* time you": 1. "spray for roaches" or 2. "don't take all your
>antibiotics"?
You should get your doctor to explain the antibiotics to you. I'm surprised
he/she hasn't already. The doctor will warn you to take *all* the
antibiotics, in order to raise the chance that you will kill all of them
(cause a little extinction, if you will). If you only take some of them,
you kill off all the weak ones leaving only the strong ones. Then after a
while you have only the strong ones in your body and the antibiotics don't
have any effect on them. Perhaps you should read some the WHO stuff that's
been coming out lately on this subject.
>In the case of 1. if a "roach" survives after Susan sprayed it with
>insecticide, how does Susan "see" that it did not survive because she
>did not spray it properly? Also how does Susan "see" that the "roach"
>does not die later without offspring?
>
>As for 2. how does Susan "see" bacteria, let alone that they have been
>naturally `selected' against the effects of the "antibiotics"?
I'm not sure what you are asking here. I don't need to "see" them to know
that the Suprax which worked on my infection last time isn't working now.
The people who developed Suprax in the first place "saw" the bacteria being
selected by it. That's why it's on the market now.
>Finally, if Susan did manage to "see" the above, how does she know
>that what she sees is not natural `selection' but instead genetic "drift"?
Drift? drift is slow. Natural selection is fast. It's my understanding
(someone more knowledgeable should jump in here) that drift only pertains
to genes that don't have immediate survival value--like red hair or the
ability to curl your tongue from side to side.
Susan
--------
Always ask. Hang out with people who make you laugh. Love as many people as
you can. Read everything you can get your hands on. Take frequent naps.
Watch as little television as you can stand. Tell people what you want. Do
what you love as much as you can. Dance every day.
--------
Please visit my website:
http://www.telepath.com/susanb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 16 2000 - 21:37:35 EDT