Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AndrewC
The debate between gradualism and punctualism has raged since Darwin's time. Punctualism is gaining ground, especially as particular mechanisms are elucidated which can explain it. The thread about the Ubx genes is another example of that. Non-random "natural genetic engineering" is an example of a deterministic process in evolution.

But, Shapiro's work or words, even while they provide evidence of a mechanistic basis for rapid adaptive change, don't exactly settle the issue between determinism and non-determinism. Instead, they contribute to seeking the balance between the two that many other researchers have concluded is where evolution and life is situated. Shapiro doesn't work in a vacuum and a large body of literature about transposable elements and their role in genome restructuring address both the random and non-random aspects of their effects.

205 posted on 02/21/2002 10:27:39 AM PST by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies ]


To: Nebullis
But, Shapiro's work or words, even while they provide evidence of a mechanistic basis for rapid adaptive change, don't exactly settle the issue between determinism and non-determinism.

Exactly. That is why I state "if this analysis is correct". But it appears that the momentum is in the favor of the engineering cell and if it can explain any evolution it potentially explains all evolution (since Darwinians put it all in one basket) with the exception of its own genesis.

207 posted on 02/21/2002 10:45:12 AM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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