Darwinist
Out of context: Reply #160
- Started
- Last post
- 592 Responses
- mikotondria20
Evolution does not distinguish between micro and macro evolution, the success of any arrangement of matter, beit from a change in dna coding to produce variations in protein, or the larger scale effects of same that might compound to produce better resistance to disease, a more crumpled ear, darker hair etc..
The truth is that almost almost always, these minor variations within a species are harmful, something inthe order of 1 in a 100 billion are not..
Because these changes are usually deliterious to the individual that carries the instructions to build them, the individual has a low chance of reproducing, and so, with fossilisation being so very very rare, are not preserved..
So, when we look back thru the fossil record, what we dont see are the mutations that didnt survive to be fossilised.. A mutation - a change in physiology must have to be extrememly advantageous to have have produced enough individuals to have entered the 'fossilisation lottery'.
Fossilisation does not, of course, preserve evolutionary/mutational evidence at the molecular level - we must assume that changes in physiology then we, as today, caused by molecular changes, which is not unreasonable.
Does that cover it ?