: : : What does any of this have to do with Astronomy?

: : : Your statement about mamillian geneology is not only inappropriate for this forum, it is also patently false.

: : : How about asking an Astronomy/God question since THAT is the title and subject of this forum, not evolution.

: : : You'll find the evolution debate in many OTHER forums on the Net, but it is not on track for this one.

: : Hmmmm... the top of my screen says "Astronomy Net Forum on God and Science... So, how does Darwinian theory account for the complexity of the mammalian genome?...

: : ::: : Considering that there are probably several people reading this board who have a strong background in biology, and since YOU brought it up, why don't you explain what your data is to back this claim up? Who told you Darwinian theory can't account for this?

Actually there is quite a bit that Darwinian theory can't account for. Though I am not a biologist I don't feel particularly intimidated by any who may be reading this. On the other hand, if I say anything that is incorrect, I would not be at all offended if they would point it out. The basis of the theory is natural selection working on random variation in the genome. Scince there are a limited number of mutations that occur in a given population, coupled with the fact that most would not be "selected", then the element of time becomes problematic when trying to account for the genetic complexity of the higher taxa. Darwin's dillemma (sort of has a ring to it) is further exacerbated by the fact that scince the mutations occur by random, most would be of no benefit (if not lethal) to the organism.

• Re: the death of darwin - daViper - July 14, 1999 - 01:20 UTC
  • Re: the death of darwin - bzrd - July 15, 1999 - 17:45 UTC
    • Re: the death of darwin - daViper - July 15, 1999 - 21:50 UTC
      • Re: the death of darwin - Teresa/">Teresa - February 28, 2000 - 23:45 UTC