Darwinist ignorance and confusion (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, June 12, 2010, 03:04 (5278 days ago) @ David Turell


> > Therefore it would seem to me that fitness determines speciation. Where am I wrong here?
> 
> NS and fitness define variation to challenge in current existing species. Speciation occurs, I believe epigenetically, and NS decides potential survivorship. We think slightly differently.-I'm not convinced of that just yet...-To me, there is a cause that forces an organism to change. If the change is "bad," NS wipes it out. If it's neutral or "good," the change stays. NS is the factor that makes the "decision." Epigenetics don't make a decision at all; it's a fist in the clay; a foot on the accelerator--a mad stroke of the paint brush! -In Computer Science, if I write a filter for a large set of data--the only thing that matters is the output. In fact, it can be said that the input has no meaning at all. However, the filter--applied against the data set--is the cause for the final form that you see. Epigenetics, frameshifts, point mutations--all of these--are changes that have no meaning unless it results in a corresponding shift in fitness in an organism. Fitness is determined by the filter; not the input. -Or, using a design analogy; there's no way to tell your design works until you toss it out into the world. Tinker or change it all you want; the environment and the rest of the world decides what becomes of your design--not you. -So again; I stress that though the argument in my case is largely semantic; speciation occurs after natural selection has made some kind of decision on the innovation.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"