Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!vecpyr!lll-crg!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: Catastrophic Evolution: reply # 2 to Message-ID: <1268@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Fri, 16-Aug-85 10:59:24 EDT Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1268 Posted: Fri Aug 16 10:59:24 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 03:48:22 EDT References: <369@imsvax.UUCP> Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD Lines: 31 >> If Ron's 116 aren't good enough, I've got several more. The >>one that really kills Darwinism as far as I'm concerned goes as >>follows: chance mutations are mostly harmful or fatal and even >>these are rare. The ones which aren't harmful are extremely >>rare and are isolated in time and local e.g. a child with six >>fingers may be born in Paris in 1725 A.D. and the next such >>child in Chicago in 1912 A.D. What are the chances of these two >>marrying and having six-fingered children? Further, many >>higher animals will simply kill mutants. Amongst humans, in >>every century prior to this one, this phenomenon took the form >>of the witchcraft trial. This argument has so many holes in it it's hard to know where to start. First of all, let's take the six finger example. Assuming that polydactyl children do arise as a result of genetic mutation, and that it has some small advantage, then we get three possibilities. The first is that it is a dominant mutation; in this case, it only takes one. Whichever example survives long enough to bear progeny will serve as the focus for steady growth. The second possibility is that it is a submissive trait. In this case, survival to progeny gives dispersal of the gene, all the more so because it is hidden. Eventually the children of the various lines will come together and the trait will reveal itself again; if it has an advantage, even a small one, it will continue to grow as a proportion of the population. In the third case, the trait is composed of a number of genes. This case is much like the submissive case. So it's simply a question of how often you roll the dice. As for killing mutations, it must be pointed out that not all such killings are successful. Again, it's simply a matter of rolling the dice enough. Charley Wingate