Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à t origins 
Sujet : Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?
De : rokimoto (at) *nospam* cox.net (RonO)
Groupes : talk.origins
Date : 27. Mar 2024, 12:22:31
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <uu0vhl$2pq13$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/26/2024 1:00 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
"A new wave of scientists argues that mainstream evolutionary theory needs an urgent overhaul. Their opponents have dismissed them as misguided careerists – and the conflict may determine the future of biology....Strange as it sounds, scientists still do not know the answers to some of the most basic questions about how life on Earth evolved. Take eyes, for instance. Where do they come from, exactly? The usual explanation of how we got these stupendously complex organs rests.
 "https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jun/28/do-we-need-a-new-theory-of-evolution
 >
DOES EVOLUTION THEORY NEED A RETHINK?
 https://www.nature.com/articles/514161a
 
If you had read the nature opinion piece you would know that nothing much is going to change with respect to IDiots and other Biblical creationists.  This just doesn't matter for creationists.
Take their claims that there is more to inheritance than genes.  We have known this since the beginning of the modern synthesis, before we knew what a gene was.
Genes + environment = phenotype.
Look it up.  This has been known to be the case before we had the modern synthesis, before we knew what genes were.  The opinion piece only wants to claim that the phenotypic changes due to environmental causes can aid natural selection.  The equation doesn't have to change.  The results will be the same.  It has been known for a very long time that the environmental changes could broaden the range of phenotypes that you could get from any specific genotype.  It is no surprise to anyone that if the phenotype can be bent towards something that allows a genotype to exploit some new resource or have some selective advantage in that environment that it can act as a temporary boost for that genotype, and that new mutations or resorting of existing variation with that genotype can result in the genome being better adapted to that environment.  They aren't changing anything, they are just stating the obvious.  The environment can influence phenotype.  If an environmental influence changes the phenotype in such a way that, that specific genotype has some selective advantage in that environment, the genotype can be selected for in that environment.  Other genetic variation can make the adaptation even better.
It can be complex.  A shift in temperature could cause a phenotypic change that better adapted the organism to living in a rocky area, so that genotype could be selected for in a rocky area under those temperature conditions.  Add a few more genetic variants and you may no longer need the environmental boost to compete in that new environment. No matter how complex or whether or not the phenotypic change has some advantage in that environment, nothing changes in terms of what we know about how the environment affects phenotype.
IDiots and other anti-evolution creationists are just out of luck on this one.
Ron Okimoto

Date Sujet#  Auteur
26 Mar 24 * IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?27Ron Dean
26 Mar 24 +* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?7John Harshman
26 Mar 24 i`* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?6Ron Dean
26 Mar 24 i `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?5John Harshman
26 Mar 24 i  +* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?3Pro Plyd
26 Mar 24 i  i+- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1Ron Dean
27 Mar 24 i  i`- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1RonO
27 Mar 24 i  `- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1Ron Dean
27 Mar 24 +* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?2*Hemidactylus*
27 Mar 24 i`- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1Ron Dean
27 Mar 24 +* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?6jillery
27 Mar 24 i`* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?5FromTheRafters
27 Mar 24 i `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?4John Harshman
29 Mar 24 i  `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?3jillery
29 Mar 24 i   `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?2John Harshman
30 Mar 24 i    `- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1jillery
27 Mar 24 +- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1RonO
27 Mar 24 `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?10Burkhard
27 Mar 24  `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?9John Harshman
27 Mar 24   `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?8Burkhard
28 Mar 24    `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?7John Harshman
28 Mar 24     `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?6Burkhard
28 Mar 24      +* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?2John Harshman
28 Mar 24      i`- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1Ernest Major
28 Mar 24      `* Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?3J. J. Lodder
28 Mar 24       +- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1Athel Cornish-Bowden
28 Mar 24       `- Re: IS A NEW THEORY OF EVOLUTION NEEDED?1Martin Harran

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal