Definition of evolution

in what concept ? in the concept that Evolution is allele frequency change ? nope. it's not implicit at all. Mutation is a gene change, but that is not population allele frequency change.

And no mutation happening whatsoever on that gene meanwhile.

I'm not sure what you're not understanding here. Allele frequency change is the fundamental concept of population genetics

and by definition two different alleles are genetic variants of the same genetic locus.

So I'd like to hear you explain how genetic sequences change in a given genetic locus if not by mutation (and I'm using an 'inclusive' concept of mutation here that includes translocations, insertions, deletions, duplications, point mutations, etc).

If you dispute that 'evolution' has to do with changes in populations over time, then we're definitely not on the same page.

And no mutation happening whatsoever on that gene meanwhile.

but both alleles happened to already both be in your example population in the first generation.

If these are functionally important genes, then a population change in frequencies of X versus Z will result in an overall biologically different population in future generations.

is population genetics "Evolution" ?

As I said a couple posts ago, this is food for a different thread, so I beseech you to restrain your penchant for thread hijacking and let Sword take this discussion where he wants.

I removed it because it was off topic. It's a legitimate topic for here.

And no, I don't feel dumb. I appreciate the challenge. I've got a pretty good command of evolutionary biology, but ultimately it's imperfect because I don't do it for a living.

You happen to be very much in the business of shooting ideas down, yet seldom offer your own ideas. So here's your chance. Speak your mind.

You, my friend, introduced the discussion that I moved here. Sword did not.

I really do not enjoy my interchanges with you, not because of the topic but because of your interpersonal style. But I'll go along with you in this to show that I'm not moving it just to get out of a conversation..

Let's try and reach common ground here.

Point #1 -- agree / disagree / elaborate, please:

The theory of evolution describes biological changes in populations over time.

If you disagree, please tell me what the "theory of evolution" means in your own understanding of it.

I quess the question in my mind runs something like this:
Ultimately in higher organisms it is behaviors that give survival and procreation advantages.

That's true for insects too.

Not all higher organisms have behaviors, for instance terrestrial plants.

So we need to discuss the biological common ground between animals (which employ behaviors as part of their survival strategy) and vegetative creatures like plants and fungi (which don't).

if Sword does not object you should move it back in, because you used his intentions for the thread as your excuse.

by what measure do plants not have or employ behaviours ?

Well, I used my discretion as a forum moderator as an excuse based on the justification that I've already provided, and in fact I have the latitude to do so. Sword does not reply to that thread very often, and I know from experience that a digression that is off the original topic is likely to drown him out. If you're interested in the topic of how Aedes defines evolution, here is your chance. You've cowered away from answering the question I've asked (and you've quoted). Do you have what it takes to go head to head with me when I'm asking you the hard questions? You're 0 for 1 in this new thread so far.

[/COLOR]What FORMAL definition of "behavior" do you accept that describes any aspect of plant biology? Let's make sure we're using the same definition as one another.

No that is not so at all. Darwin knew almost nothing about genes, genetics or alleles. Evolution is the change in species over time, including the extinction of some species and the development of new species. (as opposed to fixity of species).