Replies

"DNA actually proofreads itself in some cases. So this would prevent change."

Oh, my. Yes, DNA most often replicates accurately, but not always. That's why you don't look exactly like either of your parents, you see. That's variation. It's one of the amazing things about sexual reproduction. There is an almost endless variety available, even from just two parents.

Now, just suppose both of your parents had rather short fingers, but you expressed a genetic trait that meant you ended up with long, slender fingers, something that happens all the time. This is really simple, so I know you'll be able to follow along.

Your parents, with their short fingers, would have been very poor at becoming concert pianists, while you might well excel at that, having the long, slender fingers required. Or, perhaps a concert violinist.

Now, imagine a world where concert pianists and violinists made a great deal of money, thereby attracting mates who liked success. Your offspring would be more likely to have those long fingers, and be more likely to be concert pianists or violinists, thereby becoming successful and mating successfully. More long fingers. More success. This is variation.

You are not a clone. You are a wierd blend of genetic characteristics that melds the genetic material of countless generations in your line of descent. When something pops out that helps you succeed, you attract better mates. Eventually, everyone in your line may have longer and longer fingers, and become a species of pianists or violinists that cannot breed with short-fingered plebes.

All things that are taught in any simple science class. It doesn't mean the genes aren't or weren't there. For all you know, my grandmother could have had long fingers and my grandfather have short. It doesn't mean anything. The recurrence of the trait for long fingers if I mated with someone else with long fingers is much greater than the recurrence of traits against having long fingers. Also, there are some here that say or believe I'm against evolution, I'm not, but I'm not for it either.

As for variation, true. It doesn't always replicate accurately, but most often it does. But the chances for a mutation is not great (and a chance for a positive mutation even less likely). Using your theory of mutation, I can argue that if the most common bloodtype is O, then why isn't everybody O after over more than ten thousand years (estimated)? O would be the most logical to develop because it is a universal bloodtype for my specie.

Going back to your last statement:

Eventually, everyone in your line may have longer and longer fingers, and become a species of pianists or violinists that cannot breed with short-fingered plebes.

How do you know it won't recur if the DNA for short fingers is in either my mates or my own DNA?