How children pick up a language: new review of Wolfe (Humans)

by dhw, Tuesday, November 15, 2016, 13:53 (2929 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: There is no disagreement between us on the fact that a new species requires multiple new organized mutations. “New numbers” is the point at issue, since you insist the numbers must be large. I don’t see why.
DAVID: Just read my first statement above about hybrids (old phenotype combined with new phenotype). The gaps don't show them. In a new sexual species there must be males and females to tango together to create a stable population of new forms. This means the new large population of newly integrated mutations has to appear at the same time in both male and female. Not by chance. And don't tell me your favored cell populations (whatever that means)cross talk between male and female!

You asked earlier how individuals choose the same DNA changes, and I answered: “Because the cell communities [not "populations"] are coping with or exploiting the same environment”. If you have a group of individuals in a particular location where there is a particular change in environmental conditions, it stands to reason that the members of that group will make the same adjustments. We see the same phenomenon in convergent evolution: where similar conditions exist, organisms make similar changes to themselves. You won’t get hybrids if "just a few" fish stay ashore and the rest stay in the water.

dhw: What do the mathematicians regard as a viable number to start a new species? […]
DAVID: Population genetics math must involve starting numbers of new species!

You don’t need math to tell you that any new species needs at least two to tango. “Starting numbers” does not mean large numbers.

DAVID: It just takes a few dividing every 20 minutes with all the survival mechanisms on board. That is obvious math to the power of two.
dhw: Good to hear that just a few cells are needed to pass on millions and millions of programmes. May I suggest that just a few organisms might be needed to pass on ONE programme, as individuals come up with the innovations that lead to new species? With these “just a few” reproducing, within “just a few” generations numbers will increase exponentially until you have lots and lots of them. Obvious math.
DAVID: Remember we are discussing single celled organisms which pass every code onboard.

I have questioned the likelihood of the first cells having on board every single code that led to every single innovation and natural wonder in the history of life, let alone the likelihood of their descendants also being able to pass them all on through the next 3.8 billion years. If you consider it possible that “just a few” unicellular organisms could contain and pass on millions of programmes for multicellular organisms, why do you consider it impossible that a few multicelluilar organisms can pass on ONE new programme?