ericmurphy
Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote (afdave @ Oct. 24 2006,10:58) | | Let me revise my previous statement, now that I understand your definition more clearly: What ToE really needs is mutations which increase specificity. |
Why, Dave? What does "specificity" have to do with it? What the ToE really needs is a mechanism by which organisms can become better adapted to their environment, which it has: Natural Selection. If this happens by a gain of specificity, fine. If this happens by a loss of specificity, that's fine too.
Which organisms are more successful, Dave? Those that can only live in a rigidly-defined environment, dependent on a particular type of food? Pandas and Koalas spring to mind as examples. Lots of specificity there! Or organisms that have less specificity, like rats or cockroaches?
Your "specificity" requirement is a strawman, just like your requirement of "hominid civilizations." Neither one is a requirement or a prediction of evolutionary theory.
And you still haven't explain why your increase from a few thousand "kinds" on the ark to a few million species today doesn't amount to hyper-mega-macroevolution.
"A few dozen new species a day: that's all we ask." (a friend of mine actually knows the guy who came up with that ad campaign.)
--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity
"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams
|
