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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David R who wrote (94699)	11/29/2000 6:41:53 PM
From: Enam Luf	Respond to of 769667

Punctuated equilibrium has some validity, imo, because different mutations can have drastically different outcomes. However, I believe it is also a matter of probability and survival of the fittest. Wait, I not sure if i get what you are saying, ... In modern evolutionary theory, cats and dogs share a common ancestor somewhere millions of years ago that was neither cat nor dog, then little by little the features appeared that were catlike and dogllike (in two separate populations that were likely separated geographically so as to allow concentration of the gene pool), there are many fossils to show this evolution. I think perhaps that what you are saying refers to an idea that is woefully out of date in science. However when a new mutation is thrown into the mix, it disturbs the equilibrium and results in more rapid change (this is true of any system). As an aside, a non functioning extra toe or finger on a human is a very common mutation on humans. I wonder how many skeletons have been unearthed out of the thousands from ancient times that have this characteristic. The farther back you go, the more the probability of finding failed mutations becomes very low.