Re: [asa] Darwin only biological evolution? (can anything exist without evolution?)

From: Murray Hogg <>
Date: Thu Jan 15 2009 - 15:51:57 EST

Hi Dave,

Again, somebody made a point I've been wanting to get to!

I was once pointed out to me that biological evolution doesn't require increasing complexity - what it requires is successful adaptation and if this involves a LOSS of complexity then so be it.

Indeed, it occurs to me now that YEC's are quite right to point out that one reason that artificial selection is a bad analogue for biological evolution is that it results in a net loss of complexity/information. Certain breeds of dogs may be brilliantly adapted for life in Paris Hilton's handbag, but I doubt they are genetically more complex than their wolf ancestors!

Anyhow, I think it right to point out, as you do, that the idea that evolution involves progress and that a more complex organism is necessarily more involved is perhaps something we impose upon the data than infer from it.


D. F. Siemens, Jr. wrote:
> Bernie,
> Don't forget that parasites have simplified their structure over time.
> It's not always from simple to complex, although there have been people
> obsessed with the notion of universal progress.
> Dave (ASA)

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 15 15:52:33 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 15 2009 - 15:52:33 EST