Your response included the statement, “Evolution does not require an individual organism to survive long enough to accumulate many mutations.”, which implied that the Randomized Death Barrier somehow operated against an individual organism surviving long enough to ‘accumulate’ many mutations… but that is not the level on which the RDB works, or what it blocks.
Kind of a long sentence, because of having to include the idea being refuted :) The RDB is speaking of the probability that a mutation, having occured in the DNA of an individual, being passed on into the general population, and pointing out that fitness only has a partial influence on whether that will happen.
Bottom line: many mutations in the gametes never find their way into general population. That is why evolution is very slow. It does not say that it doesn’t happen. Your RDB isn’t a sealed barrier; it’s a filter.
Yes, that is how I presented it in the original post:
. “So a minuscule advantage would be just as likely to die out as the person without the minuscule advantage.’
It is a randomized filter. It does not filter out the less fit, it filters out on a random basis.
Many people have the idea that if an organization has an advantage, it will survive while other’s around it die. But the third best team can be knocked out of a single elimination tournament on the first round… if they happened to meet the first or second team, or if their best player breaks their leg jogging to the event, or if a bridge was out on the route and they didn’t show up….
No, the advantage comes when selecting among the traits that have made it into the population, not when selecting among mutations that have not made it so far.
They were a species of birds that he observed, which changed appearance and food sources based on what was available. This was not an example of new mutations, but of selections among the variants in the genome that already existed.
The basic evolutionary process is not just random mutations - it is mutations combined with environmental filtering.
Yes, I am aware of them. Have listened to some pretty serious explanations of them, including how the theory of what happened to them has radically changed over the years… as you point out.
I assume you are aware that selections among the variations that already exist is a concept that is fully congruent with both Intelligent Design and Special Creation. Indeed, more so than evolution.
They would both point out, rather casually, that of course an intelligent designer, especially an omniscient one, would take care to put lots of bullets in the magazine of the creatures He designed… enabling them to adapt as circumstances warranted.
Well... really? For an infinitely powerful designer, who is capable of intervening at any time in anything... yeah, no, sorry, no.
Special Creation is not a form of Deism. It does not involve a God who sits back and does nothing. He would capable of making genetic interventions at any time.
Outside of the fanciful and doom-laden narrative, what is the essential difference between what I had said and you did?
Please express it in a single sentence.
Anything for you, Russ :)
Your response included the statement, “Evolution does not require an individual organism to survive long enough to accumulate many mutations.”, which implied that the Randomized Death Barrier somehow operated against an individual organism surviving long enough to ‘accumulate’ many mutations… but that is not the level on which the RDB works, or what it blocks.
Kind of a long sentence, because of having to include the idea being refuted :) The RDB is speaking of the probability that a mutation, having occured in the DNA of an individual, being passed on into the general population, and pointing out that fitness only has a partial influence on whether that will happen.
Bottom line: many mutations in the gametes never find their way into general population. That is why evolution is very slow. It does not say that it doesn’t happen. Your RDB isn’t a sealed barrier; it’s a filter.
Yes, that is how I presented it in the original post:
. “So a minuscule advantage would be just as likely to die out as the person without the minuscule advantage.’
It is a randomized filter. It does not filter out the less fit, it filters out on a random basis.
Many people have the idea that if an organization has an advantage, it will survive while other’s around it die. But the third best team can be knocked out of a single elimination tournament on the first round… if they happened to meet the first or second team, or if their best player breaks their leg jogging to the event, or if a bridge was out on the route and they didn’t show up….
No, the advantage comes when selecting among the traits that have made it into the population, not when selecting among mutations that have not made it so far.
Are you familiar with Darwin's Finches? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin%27s_finches
They were a species of birds that he observed, which changed appearance and food sources based on what was available. This was not an example of new mutations, but of selections among the variants in the genome that already existed.
The basic evolutionary process is not just random mutations - it is mutations combined with environmental filtering.
Yes, I am aware of them. Have listened to some pretty serious explanations of them, including how the theory of what happened to them has radically changed over the years… as you point out.
I assume you are aware that selections among the variations that already exist is a concept that is fully congruent with both Intelligent Design and Special Creation. Indeed, more so than evolution.
They would both point out, rather casually, that of course an intelligent designer, especially an omniscient one, would take care to put lots of bullets in the magazine of the creatures He designed… enabling them to adapt as circumstances warranted.
There are only so many variants possible to put into two people
Well... really? For an infinitely powerful designer, who is capable of intervening at any time in anything... yeah, no, sorry, no.
Special Creation is not a form of Deism. It does not involve a God who sits back and does nothing. He would capable of making genetic interventions at any time.
So, sorry, no.