@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:By the way recently a scientific journal, sorry can't recall what exactly, published something about evolution not being random variation. Can't give you much details on it I barely recall reading it en passent.
From what I know, there appear to be more and more studies coming out which tend to show, and more and more evolutionary theorists concluding, that a fundamental precept of Neo-Darwinism (aka the "modern synthesis'), random variation, is unsound. The claim is that at least some mutations are "directed" toward achieving a desired end. Many say these are "self-directed," selected and/or originated by the organism itself.
Same with "natural selection," which many theorists now believe is almost insignificant as a "driving force" of evolution.
All rejected by dogmatic Neo-Darwinists as blasphemous "LaMarckism," of course. To them, what's possible in practice is irrelevant. It's only what's possible "in theory" that counts.