Gradualism in Evolution not supported by genome studies (Agnosticism)

by dhw, Friday, October 09, 2020, 12:55 (1505 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: In the light of all this, why is my theory not feasible?

DAVID: Because the evidence presented does not support it for new genes. Where I agree is: new functions of old genes by reorganization of gene expression and redeveloped gene wide network associations may well be the cause of speciation.

dhw: The evidence presented emphasizes the existence of new genes, and the fact that they replace old genes. I agree that the remaining genes will be restructured. All this is an exact repeat of my proposal that speciation is caused by the “acquisition of new genes (or new functions for old genes) and loss of unwanted genes. Natural selection merely decides which genes are necessary and which are not.” However, I must stress that I am not arguing with Behe – I can only discuss the points you raise. Now please tell me why my proposal is not feasible.

I would like to make a slight change to my proposal, in direct opposition to the theory I have been objecting to: Speciation is caused by the acquisition of new genes AND new functions for old genes, and is ACCOMPANIED by loss of unwanted genes etc.

DAVID: Yes, we both agree new genes appear, but the evidence is still on the side that speciation involves loss of genes. To repeat: "new functions of old genes by reorganization of gene expression and redeveloped gene wide network associations may well be the cause of speciation." Your proposal covers the same ground. Our difference is I think God is doing the coding.

I don’t know why you feel it is necessary to repeat everything I have said in my original proposal, but thank you for withdrawing your objection to new genes, dropping your insistence that loss of genes CAUSES speciation, and agreeing with me that old genes take on new functions. The argument has been about the cause of speciation, and I am perfectly happy, as I always have been, to acknowledge the possibility that there is a God who did the coding. If you now accept my revised proposal, I think we can close this thread.