Evolution: a different view (Introduction)

by dhw, Sunday, May 10, 2015, 21:13 (3484 days ago) @ David Turell

FOR SOME REASON, ALL OF THIS IS IN ITALICS, AND I CAN'T CHANGE IT. I HAVE PUT MY RESPONSES IN BOLD. -
dhw:

: This fitness path suggests that there has been a specific evolutionary trend toward maximizing the range of possible signals.” 
Absolutely no hint of a change that lay unused for (hundreds of) thousands of years. And forgive me, but I don't see how the writer's suggestion that the change was a pre-adaptation, and his asking what led to its formation, can constitute evidence of non-use or of divine pre-planning.-DAVID: My concept of exaptation in this area comes from Tattersall. I keep repeating that.-MY RESPONSE: This is like Dawkins saying his concept of evolution comes from Darwin. What does that prove? If you can't defend the claim that exaptations, including the lowered larynx, denote features that hung around unused for (hundreds of) thousands of years, thereby providing a vital pointer to God's pre-planning, it would be better to rescind it, regardless of Tattersall.
 
DAVID: I've covered this in my reply to Tony. Of course, earlier forms used the equipment but in no way comparable to us. I assumed that was understood. My first book would have benefitted from your commentaries :-MY RESPONSE: Thank you, but no, you have not covered it. Tony is actually challenging you on common descent, but in your response you are simply saying that in the course of evolution, important changes took place. That is what happens in evolution! Otherwise, we would have stuck at bacterial level. It does not prove that exaptations, including the lowered larynx, hung around unused etc. (see above), and that was the claim that sprouted this whole branch of the discussion between you and me.