Joined: Sep. 2002
|Quote (Hermagoras @ April 18 2009,18:32)|
|David Kellogg tries to pin down jerry: |
jerry, this may be a good time to point out that you have never adequately answered me on the question of punctuated equilibrium. I said your representation of PE on another thread was completely inaccurate. You replied by claiming it was accurate but otherwise merely provided a lot of bluster (nonspecific references to Allen MacNeill etc). I [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/pretending-that-darwinism-is-sophisticated-and-difficult-to<br>-understand-science-i
n-order-to-deflect-challenges-or-mickey-mouse-pretends-to-be-a-scientist/#comment-311731]pointed out[/URL] that your reply was not responsive. Let me quote from that:
|To recap, your claims is that PE involves “changes that happen out of sight in unused parts of the genome.” You write that in PE, “[a] very small number of these changes suddenly become functional and this is when a new species or genera are born.” You even write that “This is the essence of punctuated equilibrium.”|
Can you provide a quote from Gould or Eldredge that supports this? Can you even provide a quote from MacNeill that supports this? I think you can’t. It shouldn’t be hard. The original PE paper is available online, along with a number of other of Gould’s works on PE.
Please don’t just tell me that everybody knows this is what the theory says. It isn’t.
Why ask it on this thread? Because this thread is where you seem to be paying attention, because others have questioned (and you have defended) how much you know about evolution, and because PE is a theory about macro-level changes. If you’ve got that wrong — as I think you do — it may be relevant.
|If you have access still to Berkeley’s library then I suggest you go to Paleobiology in 2005 and there was an issue devoted to macro evolution. It was made into a book by Vrba and Eldredge on macro evolution but all the chapters are in Paleobiology so you can download them. Read the first chapter by a guy name Jurgen Brosius. This is the essence of the debate. Brosius assumes it is a slam dunk that naturalistic evolution caused all the changes but not through Darwinian processes so I am not sending you to an ID person but to a virulent anti ID one|
The Brosius paper is about retronuons, how they can be exaptations, and how exaptations may play a large role. In other words, jerry thinks the 'essence of the debate" is about deferred adaptations. As if this idea is new or particularly controversial...LOL
The hyperbole/knowledge ratio in this one is huge.
Edited by KCdgw on April 18 2009,19:01
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius