sevensixtwo
Junior Member
- Messages
- 144
Meaning anyone at all can post anything they want there. This dismisses the paper as nonscientific in nature. Besides, it attempts to debunk evolution by mutation rates, which has not for a long time been how evolution has been explained - genetic drift is a large part of it.ViXra is an open repository for new scientific articles. It does not endorse e-prints accepted on its website, neither does it review them against criteria such as correctness or author's credentials.
The above modeling was based on ONLY genetic drift, with no mutation occurring. SourceMain Points: 1) total variation does not change; variation goes from within populations (no variation between populations) to between populations (no variation within populations). 2) genetic divergence of populations entirely by chance! (no selection). This is why genetic drift can be an important force in evolution.
When Darwin said "fittest," he didn't mean in the best physical shape. He meant fittest to survive (and, mainly, to reproduce.) Adaptability is a large part of that survival, although there are other aspects, all of them (including "fittest") mostly random.
There are unexplained gaps in evolution.
There's also a fallacy about the idea of survival of the fittest.
The fittest isn't the species that survives. The species that survives is the species that is the most adaptable.
Am I? Please point out my mistake.Harte, you are making a mistake coming at me with this stupid shit
My last post directly (and only) concerned the OP's quote, which quote was the entirety of the OP.Please guys, let's get back and stick to the topic of this thread.
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant sevensixtwo, not you. And it's really just an expression, anyway.My last post directly (and only) concerned the OP's quote, which quote was the entirety of the OP.Please guys, let's get back and stick to the topic of this thread.
Where am I going off topic?
Harte