Evolving Evolution

[iNow]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

Why is the idea of God so negative for you?

[swansont]

Or, to paraphrase Pierre-Simon Laplace

We have no need of that hypothesis

[Luc Turpin]

3 hours ago, CharonY said:

1- And on what is that based on? There is plenty of evidence of neutral mutations, there are established models suggesting why they stick around and on top it is well-known that they are key drivers of evolution, as they expand the genetic space for traits to develop. This is all well-documented under the neutral theory of evolution. In fact, I recommend to read literal book on that matter (Motoo Kimura, The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution). It is the pretty much the de facto model in molecular sciences since the late 80s.

2- You will need significantly more than just a different perspective to overthrow the massive mountain of literature that is based on it.

1- My original statement was : Neutral mutations are frequent changes in DNA that don't affect an organism's survival or reproduction. While they don't directly drive evolutionary change, they contribute to genetic diversity, creating a reservoir of variations that can later support beneficial mutations. And I stand by it.

2- No overthrowing of theory necessary. Both chance and intention can play a role in evolution, especially if you include cultural evolution. Adding intention into the mix does not disprove evolutionary theory; it just increases complexity by recognizing that intentional actions can also influence change. And God is not necessarily required for intention to be brought into the evolutionary picture

 

[swansont]

20 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

Both chance and intention can play a role in evolution

There’s plenty of evidence of the former, but not the latter.

[iNow]

Luc likely means “intention” specifically in the process of sexual selection, not evolution as a whole