Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: LibWhacker

While it sounds like a large number, it’s only about 1/3 the population of humans alive today.

Now think about that from the standpoint of evolutionary theory. Supposedly these would have evolved from something else substantially different, and that process would have involved only a fraction of that population. The problem is that there are not nearly enough mutational resources in such limited populations for natural selection to work with to lead to substantial innovations. (If there were we’d be seeing some really interesting new life forms simply from the current generation of humans, for example.)

The problem gets even worse considering very small populations like many whales, which supposedly evolved very substantially over time. If I were still an evolutionist it’s the sort of thing that would keep me awake at night.


17 posted on 04/16/2021 1:43:24 PM PDT by EnderWiggin1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: EnderWiggin1970

Chance mutation cannot explain what we see in the evolutionary record. Something is driving it.


21 posted on 04/16/2021 1:46:42 PM PDT by Seruzawa (The political Left is the Garden of Eden of Incompetence - Marx the Smarter (Groucho))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: EnderWiggin1970
it’s only about 1/3 the population of humans alive today.

For an animal that was more than 50 times the mass of an average human.

24 posted on 04/16/2021 1:48:59 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson