Wesley R. Elsberry
Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002
|
| Quote (Dr.GH @ Dec. 16 2019,15:08) | What obvious things have I missed?
"Mendel's Accountant" was John Sanford's attempt to present his idea of "genetic entropy" as if it were based on empirical science, and even computable.
First, his assumptions about mutation rates, and their "negativity" are bogus.
Second, he ignored the fact that environments vary and so adaptive fitness does too.
Third, he ignored the relatively small cost of a failed egg, or a failed sperm.
Fourth, he ignored the fact of a "purifying" selection.
Fifth, as part of his "young earthism," he ignored all the known mass extinction events.
Sixth, continued research on fitness landscapes shows that just the opposite of his "entropy" can, and does happen. And, it is not always better to be best;
"The treacheries of adaptation" Craig R. Miller Science 25 Oct 2019: Vol. 366, Issue 6464, pp. 418-419 DOI: 10.1126/science.aaz5189 https://science.sciencemag.org/content........418 (See the linked papers from Miller's paper). |
Don't forget the claim that larger genomes or populations with short generation times went defunct faster. I don't think there was a response to the continued good health of Amoeba dubia populations.
--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker
|
