Re: [asa] Papers from colloquium

From: Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com>
Date: Sat May 12 2007 - 23:40:39 EDT

On May 12, 2007, at 6:11 PM, PvM wrote:

> Good point and we should remember that adaption is but one, though
> important part, of evolutionary mechanisms.
> Funny how indeed evolution may had to depend on neutrality to deal
> with concepts of modularity, robustness and evolvability. But then
> again, neutrality may very well have been under selective pressures as
> well.

That was part of my point but also how it is easy for both sides of
the ID debate to have "just so" stories. As someone who comes more
from the physical sciences the additional rigor that population
genetics gives I find helpful in avoiding the demarcation problem.
This paper is not really pro-ID. Their point that the other three non-
adaptive evolutionary mechanisms not having sufficient generative
ability got thrashed by this paper. The other point in the paper that
should not be missed by ID is the non-random nature of genetic drift
even without selection, particularly in the presence of population
bottlenecks. This point also showed up in the symbiosis paper showing
how the symbiont genomes because of the inherent bottlenecks drifted
smaller and smaller. The bottom line that needs to be communicated is
that the concept of evolution equalling natural selection is a
cartoon that's a century and a half out of date.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat May 12 23:42:07 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat May 12 2007 - 23:42:07 EDT