A retired European geneticist, Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig, has made a point that he feels is devastating to population genetic arguments about the effectiveness of natural selection. In a post at the Discovery Institute’s blog Evolution News and Views. He pointed to an argument he made in 2001 in an encyclopedia article. The essence of his criticism is that many organisms produce very large numbers of gametes, or of newborn offspring. Most of those must die. Then
It is a stunning thought that evolutionary biologists have ignored this issue. Have they? Have population geneticists ever thought about this? Well, actually they have, starting nearly 90 years ago. And the calculations that they made do not offer support to Dr. Lönnig. Let me explain …
In addition, he was interviewed two days ago by Paul Nelson, in a podcast posted very recently by the Center for Science and Culture of the Discovery Institute, on their blog Evolution News and Views. You will find it here. He makes the same point (while Nelson misunderstands him and keeps raising an unrelated point about protein spaces).If only a few out of millions and even billions of individuals are to survive and reproduce, then there is some difficulty believing that it should really be the fittest who would do so.
It is a stunning thought that evolutionary biologists have ignored this issue. Have they? Have population geneticists ever thought about this? Well, actually they have, starting nearly 90 years ago. And the calculations that they made do not offer support to Dr. Lönnig. Let me explain …
Continue reading “A devastating critique of population genetics? The Discovery Institute thinks so”.
MY COMMENT:
Hi: I differ in understanding the points at stake.
Natural Selection is a general functioning terminology, that generally applies.
But the particulars are quite the contrary to Natural Selection.
For example GENE POOL, interbreeding, does not rely on Natural Selection as such.
Though a stronger male of degraded GENE Pool might win out in breeding, this male
is already in a downward road, that NATURAL SELECTION is not going to improve...!!!
The HUMAN GENE POOL is also on a downward road...!
SO the QUESTION would be rather, how does NATURAL SELECTION "create" a improved
GENE POOL...! And we are not talking about the BIBLE or any RELIGION...!
Cheers,
George.
purelogic.
.
Hi: I differ in understanding the points at stake.
Natural Selection is a general functioning terminology, that generally applies.
But the particulars are quite the contrary to Natural Selection.
For example GENE POOL, interbreeding, does not rely on Natural Selection as such.
Though a stronger male of degraded GENE Pool might win out in breeding, this male
is already in a downward road, that NATURAL SELECTION is not going to improve...!!!
The HUMAN GENE POOL is also on a downward road...!
SO the QUESTION would be rather, how does NATURAL SELECTION "create" a improved
GENE POOL...! And we are not talking about the BIBLE or any RELIGION...!
Cheers,
George.
purelogic.
.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment