Natural Selection (Evolution)

by David Turell , Monday, November 28, 2011, 05:14 (4554 days ago) @ xeno6696

The (possible) error(s) in my thinking is/are this/these:

1. The criticism that you (and possibly David) are leveling against current evolutionary thought, is that Natural Selection alone is not sufficient for change.

NS alone is not sufficient for change. It is passive and must be preented with changes, and then NS is a major helper in the choices.

2. You and David accuse current thought as one that is too passive to account for the change we have witnessed.

Which current thought do you mean?

My contention was this:
Current evolutionary thought does not think that natural selection *alone* is responsible for change.

True

3. David and yourself challenge that current evolutionary thought thinks the opposite to my previous sentence.

False

4. Darwinian thought as it originated from Charles, placed Natural Selection as the primary mechanism of why we see the species we see. (Italics here are ultra-important.)

OK

5. With the above statement, I see no reason to refute THAT part of Charles' theory, and I think you and David are opposed to THIS thought.

Theories change with time and new discoveries. CD's contentions are no longer correct. NS can never initiate change, only pass judgement on what is presented to it.

I am prepared to modify my position, but only after I get some more clarity on what my fundamental problems ARE. (It became clear to me that in the intervening months, my inability to communicate is NOT helping things... your questions were good, but they lead me to the conclusion that we're not talking about the same thing, and this is MY fault.)