IanBrown_101
Posts: 927
Joined: April 2007
|
| Quote (supersport @ Sep. 20 2007,16:04) | | Quote (IanBrown_101 @ Sep. 20 2007,09:57) | | Quote | | .why would natural selection be responsible for spreading these spines throughout the population if each individual creates them? |
Now, this may be wrong, because I'm no scientist, but how about this?
Natural selection has selected for the ability to produce said spines. The spines are able to be brought out by the flea when needed, but all fleas have been selected to be able to produce the spines if and when they need them.
Therefore the spines of a single flea are created by the flea in response to something, but the ability was generated by RM + NS. |
you are seriously moving the goal posts. Now you are saying that animals have evolved to evolve...that evolution is no longer a populational process, but an individual one. If this is the case, natural selection is finished, only to be replaced by individual adaptivity. Now it's up to you to show that natural selection has ever been a reality or that animals did not used to have this ability. Both are non-provable and non-scientific. |
No I'm not. I'm saying they evolved the ability to produce spines. The fact that the flea can produce spines isn't an evolution.
Do you consider growth of hair in humans to be an evolution within the organism? If not, why not?
--------------
I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest.
You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK
Roddenberry is my God.
|
