Epigenetics, revisited; new exciting studies (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, September 27, 2011, 15:28 (4806 days ago) @ dhw


> Darwin wrote: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."-This is not really an argument for gradualism. The argument here is irreducable compexity, a totally different philosophic beast. If you never have read Darwin's Black Box, it is a must to understand the true controversy. Can evolution make a liver? The liver digests, detoxifies (alters chemicals like antibiotics) perhaps more than the kidneys do, makes products like cholesterol, among other activities, and theis all coordinates with other organs doing their things. Gradualism relates solely to species change, and that gradualism is out the window!!
> 
> Modern research is rapidly uncovering more and more cases that undermine the argument for gradualism, but I still can't understand why Darwin considered it to be so fundamental.-I fully understand it!-> The main controversy is not about whether evolution happened, but about how, why, and over what period the changes took place.-No! The true controversy is can chance make the complexities of living organisms? It comes down to who (?) or (what chance process(?) made the liver and had it work with the other organs?