Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (429)	8/14/2000 10:57:47 AM
From: booters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

<By having more people survive, the number of novel genes, mutations, and combinations of novel genes increases in the population as a whole (since many more can survive to reproduce). It is not until conditions change to where many or most cannot survive that the selection process begins to "choose" between those combinations.> Thank you for that. Of course that is right. I have never thought of it quite that way. Now I have a whole new outlook on evolution...Duh. boots

To: TigerPaw who wrote (429)	8/14/2000 1:06:44 PM
From: pezz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

<<As it turns out the "fittest" have a better chance at survival, but just what is considered "fit" does not have to make sense to us. >> For my purposes "survival of the fittest" means that among competition for survival the winner is the fittest……..Whatever it takes…. BTW catch phrase or not it is a useful if simple definition of the practical application of natural selection . <<evolution never really stops for a reproducing life>> I'm not sure the existing evidence backs you up on this one . In unusual circumstances [our dominance would certainly qualify ] evolution can stop. The Crocodile is so well adapted to it's environment that it has not changed in 150,000,000 years . …In fact primates them selves changed very little during the time of the dinosaurs <<. Of course under the usual condition of Equilibrium I would not expect great changes in humans unless there were a severe catastrophe. At most there is a buildup of variability porportional to the overall population increase.>> Well yes a catastrophe would perhaps change things by putting what variability we now have built into the population to work......Can you suggest any such catastrophe that the changes would be evident to the naked eye? I would submit that most changes would be adaptation of our culture and technology rather than intense genetic changes. At best I think you would agree that we would need a series of such catastrophes to make any material genetic changes. As we become more and more dependent on our technology Either our technology is likely to adapt or we are likely to perish......Specialization has it's price. As to increased population growth increasing this variability we surely must be at or near any long term carrying capacity now ..Once the world population has stabilized there is no increase in the variability. As new novel genes arrive old ones [that may have been useful ] are lost. But if we do have a series of disease type catastrophes and if our technology cannot cope with them and if they do not wipe us out then you would of course be correct. I just don't see this as a likely series of events.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (429)	8/16/2000 10:02:46 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 28931

By having more people survive, the number of novel genes, mutations, and combinations of novel genes increases in the population as a whole (since many more can survive to reproduce). It is not until conditions change to where many or most cannot survive that the selection process begins to "choose" between those combinations. What is the ratio of geometric increase of the number of mutations and novel genes, relative to population increase (I am ignoring the reference to the number of genes as perhaps simply an explanatory device)? What authority may I consult that would have the most data to support this conclusion? Is the geometric increase (of novel genes)a constant ratio or does it depend on environmental factors, and if so, how is this mediated on a biological level...