16
   

Is the theory of evolution correct?

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jan, 2019 10:42 am
Peppered moths, already an evolved species with 4 polymorphic subspecies DO provide us information how the natural sellection process works. As the article LF posted, its almost a naivete but I think now we will see that the IDers will try to deny random ntural slection when industrial melanism can easily be seen in nature, (Contrary to ID's pronouncements that we "dont see this in action). Well, yes we do. Im sure teachers will still teach the process of natural selection by selective predation and Industrial melanism, where the species are favored by predation (not fixed) based upon the environment in which the moths live. Also, the kids will still look at how the dark( melanic) forms statistically "Took over" where sooty trees were the defining selecting environment.> Ive looked back at one of the earlier evolution texts (college level biological evolution)The Processes of Evolution by Ehrlich and Holm (1963). Nothing that Ehrlich says states that we are observing evolution in action because the polymorphs of Biston betularia (ssp) are subject to the same predation nd the environment provides the selection differentiator. What we are looking at is the statistical migration and frequency increase of on form ovr another.

Maybe the popular press has misspoken what this involved and Creationists just ran with it. Natural selection includes predation and the normal evolutionary results are often spoken of as the "red Queen gambit". A biologist who studied th peppered moth( produced maps of the frequencies of the various melanic forms of Biston betularia, (and the spreading out of these melanic forms). F Kettlelwell maps show how the frequencies of the darker melanic forms increased the deeper the moths went into theindutrial hartlnd of England.

These are actual fcts not anything needing "revision".
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jan, 2019 04:07 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Maybe the popular press has misspoken what this involved and Creationists just ran with it.

Gee, and after I went to all that trouble to find a pro evolution writer, not an ID advocate.

But at least he was an evolutionist that recognizes false evidence when he sees it.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jan, 2019 04:25 pm
@Leadfoot,
Did you unserstand what he was even saying? I didnt even discount anything he said becuse , if you read carefully, he is merely critiquing the concept that , many of us have been doing the same and it doesnt automatically run to ID thinking.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Jan, 2019 04:38 pm
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
But at least he was an evolutionist that recognizes false evidence when he sees it.
Why is this vidence "false", It happens, Industrial melanism occures and predation via birds alo happens. He should have poted Kettlewells maps in which he sed "pie diqgrqms" to portray polymorphic percentages from sampling stations all throughout the S UK and "favored Polymorphs" from industrial v non industrial areas can be seen in the maps. Later data, as the industrial areas have been cleaned via air pollution techniques, the percentage fvoring the lighter polymorphs has returned.

If you read What Paul Erhlich said (NOT the magic bullet Ehrlich), he stated that this was an example of ho predation can remove competing polymorph forms as more of a lab experiment in thge wild.

Weve all made that mistake here on A2k, and I take some responsibility when I ws chiding Gungasnake several years ago and may have lft an impression that this was natural selection in action when it was actually demoing predation and industrial melanism that favored already existing polymorphs. The genes for wing width nd melanistic coloring were already fixed. It would only b evolution if some of the polymorph became extinct nd others rose.
SiennaCover
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Feb, 2019 08:59 am
@kampung,
Correct!
0 Replies
 
coluber2001
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Feb, 2019 11:50 am
@farmerman,
I don't see the importance of making a distinction here. If natural selection is a factor then certain gene expressions are favorable to the organism.

For instance, in Texas we have a tree called the honey locust, which usually is armed with long thorns. I assume the thorns were useful. during the Pleistocene epoch when very large browsing mammals existed, but they no longer exist so the tree is wasting energy growing these thorns. However, there is a thornless variety I often see in the wild. I can imagine the time in the future when the thornless variety will be much more common than the thorned variety, though it may never disappear entirely. Is this not evolution at work?
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Feb, 2019 04:35 pm
@coluber2001,
do both variwtis of locust hve lrger nuts?
Maybe it int the thorns but the fruits that were of use. I had to look up thevarieties of honey locust (black, thorny, honey) they all had some throny segments of the tree. The honey locusts thorns (according to the Pa extensive arborist annual, That variety had its thorns only at the height where deer would have been deterred. Plesitocene megafauna were often ABOVE the thorn areas but within the sweet nut browse area. '
However , humans have taken to spreading this tree artificially because its found in 39 oof the 50 states and its a source of some kind of sweetened syrup. (BUT the nuts hve to be ground. Apparently not ALL the nuts are wasted on making sweetener (and Mammoths arent crappin em out) So weve got artificial selection.



Polymorphism doesnt always lead to evolution or extinction of several of the "morphs. Like the peppered moth, predation can exist under several means and as long as the moth species is extant, the polymoorphic forms may remain in the pool and the genes are expressed at some ratio that almost appears to be 1 to 1 unless predator pressure "selects" one form out for awhile
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  0  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 08:29 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Weve all made that mistake here on A2k, and I take some responsibility when I ws chiding Gungasnake several years ago and may have lft an impression that this was natural selection in action when it was actually demoing predation and industrial melanism that favored already existing polymorphs. The genes for wing width nd melanistic coloring were already fixed. It would only b evolution if some of the polymorph became extinct nd others rose.

Thanks, Hope springs eternal.
0 Replies
 
coa999
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 May, 2019 03:09 am
@kampung,
Evolution is provable. But then no scientific theory is absolutely correct. I believe it's pretty much how much how people don't get science.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 May, 2019 03:17 pm
@coa999,
The definition of science is self-explanatory.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/20/2019 at 04:02:29