From: Terry W. Colvin (fortean1@mindspring.com)
Date: Wed Feb 19 2003 - 10:48:35 MST
"ArchD'Ikon Zibethicus" wrote, Mon Feb 17;
All those quotes regarding doubts about evolution got me to
thinking -specifically, the quote which asserted that no species,
not even Drosophila, has even been observed changing into another
species...
Wouldn't it be possible, at least theoretically, to actually _test_
this empirically?
Given Drosophila's rapid rate of mutation, could one not isolate a
population and...I dunno...say repeatedly expose them to radiation
or some other stress...heavily alkaline water supply,
something...then allow a few generations to survive and breed among
themselves. Then one attempts to breed them with an un-mutated
control population.
If the mutant Drosophila couldn't interbreed with the control, but
could interbreed with themselves, isn't that one of the determinants
of species status?
Or am I missing something profoundly obvious here?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's a perfectly logical and reasonable suggestion; and is in fact
exactly what those decades of "failed" experiments, producing
mutants by using x-rays and other external what-nots, were all
about. As a consquence of all that scientific effort, the
tautology "survival of the fittest" should have been replaced with
the much more accurate slogan "rejection of the mutants" as a proper
foundation for naturalism. But that would have totally undermined
the evolutionary principle, and spoilt the whole established social
order; which is running along very profitably without those sort of
disruptive heresies, thank you very much.
What wasn't understood until quite recently, but is now throughly
established, is that every organism, without exception, is totally
integrated (like your PC) and all its parts must work together for
it to function. (You can't fly on 2% of a wing). Built into the
data-base of every organism therefore, are instructions to reject
ANY disruptive mutation -- THE VERY MUTATIONS on which neo-Darwinist
theory DEPENDS for evolution to occur. And let's be clear about
this - the drosophila experiments showed that ALL mutations are
disruptive and are automatically rejected unless they are part of a
totally integrated redesign of the entire organism.
A drosophila in the ointment.
The very changes that scientists failed to achieve with their x-ray
zappings of drosophila happened over and over in real life in
Hawaii, with hundreds of variations (species) developing in
isolation from a few original types.
This is one of the best and clearest examples of "micro-evolution",
often used to support the Darwinist theory. The other equally
appropriate description is "variations WITHIN a kind", because the
most certain finding of modern genetics is that "macro-evolution"
(Darwinism) is a scientific impossibility. Fish cannot become
squirrels. Genetic information boundaries are fixed. Apes can't
become humans.
So the fruit-flies in Hawaii, just like the Galapagos finches, and
EVERYTHING ELSE - ever, could only diversify en bloc, complete and
whole and fully functioning, into a variation of fruit-fly. But not
into a toad, a bat, or a butterfly.
I'm pushing nobody's barrow - there is a consistency here though;
which is, that just as the demography of the human race can be
reasonably traced back in a graph to a single family point a few
thousand years ago, so the same can be applied to "micro-evolution".
To take parrots as an example; the huge diversity of hundreds of
modern parrot species of different colour, size and behaviour can be
seen as spin-offs of just a few originals during the last few
thousand years, (following the Hawaiian drosophila example) and
further, we can logically trace them all back to an original pair on
the shoulder of captain Noah, if we so wish.
We need to enquire into the mechanism of re-writes of "complete" new
species --Darwin's incremental change fails - and everything that
hangs on it.
vadar
Take off your skepticles.
It is very easy to see that most of the theoretic science of the
19th century was only a relation of reaction against theologic
dogma, and has no more to do with Truth than has a wave that bounds
back from a shore. Or, if a shop girl, or you or I, should pull out
a piece of chewing gum about a yard long, that would be quite as
scientific a performance as was the stretching of this earth's age
several hundred millions of years.
--Charles Fort, The Book of the Damned
-- Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1@msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 19 2003 - 10:50:55 MST