This came up in an earlier thread, and I believe that the main driver of evolution in higher animals isn't so much random genetic mutation as it is ancestral traits and combinations of dormant genes reactivating.
This is still random, not Lamarkian, but permits traits of considerable complexity to manifest themselves in a short time. It would be hard for a worm to evolve feet, but not as hard for a snake to do so, since its ancestors did have feet. Somewhere in the snake's evolutionary attic is a set of feet, and I suspect it doesn't take all that much--relatively speaking--to switch that on.
As animals evolve over millions of years, the attic gets more things stuffed in it, and the animal can therefore evolve faster.
A corollary that seems to show that this could be true is that more primitive forms of animals seem to change very little over time. The exception is very simple forms like insects and bacteria that reproduce with such speed that even random mutations might work relatively quickly.
Space/Science » in reply to What if Evolution is wrong?
re: What if Evolution is wrong?
The whole thread (31 posts)
- What if Evolution is wrong?
- Life's like that.
- habitats move during ice ages, they don't disappear and reappear
- Nothing in your statement suggests evolution is wrong
- So many traits, so much time, so many circumstances !
- re: What if Evolution is wrong?
- re: What if Evolution is wrong?
- It would be hard to call it "wrong". The driver is a puzzlement.
- Evolution isn't random mutations.
- re: What if Evolution is wrong?