Very warm, no modern day trees, no ice, high seas

Darwin's mechanism of gradual changes leading to speciation does agree with the observed data from his time aboard the Beagle.
Can you prove that?

Because the lack of transitional fossils, stasis, the abrupt ending of species being replaced by new species says otherwise.
 
I don't know that that is true. If the changes were 'gradual' on the human scale they would have been instantaneous on the geological time scale.
So then you believe that punctuated equilibrium has no basis whatsoever? Do you understand what stasis is?
 
And what scientists are saying is not that gradualism does not happen, but rather that they think it is punctuated by rapid changes across populations. Which is just one way of saying appearance of new species. That gradualism is taking place even during periods of relative stasis. But that we often or even possibly most of the time see the parents of new species in the fossil record due to a relatively rapid change.
Stasis says otherwise.
 
Psychobabble

And we know for certain that your idea of the same mutation happening simultaneously across many individuals is absurd.

Moving on...
No. The basis of the paper. That you never read.
 
Says the guy who doesn't understand the significance of mutation rate in a paper predicated on mutations as the driver for rapid evolutionary change.
Irrelevant, red herring, childish whining, psychobabble from someone who never read and doesn't understand his own link.
 
Irrelevant, red herring, childish whining, psychobabble from someone who never read and doesn't understand his own link.
Again... Says the guy who doesn't understand the significance of mutation rate in a paper predicated on mutations as the driver for rapid evolutionary change.
 
Again... Says the guy who doesn't understand the significance of mutation rate in a paper predicated on mutations as the driver for rapid evolutionary change.
Yeah, repeating vapod psychobabble doesn't exactly make it better.
 
And believes that if greenhouse gases increase the temperature will increase despite there being evidence to the contrary. :)

Englander 420kyr CO2-T-SL rev.webp
 
Oh look, it's the uneducated slob who is terrified to take his nonsense to the big leagues.
Says the guy who can't explain why a 120 ppm greater concentration of CO2 led to a planet that was 2C cooler.
 
I just explained it. What part didn't you understand?
The part that answers my question.

I asked: do you have a mechanism for "practically complete idea emerges"

You wrote:
In the case of evolution the mechanism would be mutations which lead to functional advantages.

That seems to mimic Darwin and his gradualism. Where is this complete idea?
 
That wasn't an argument. Wow, you don't know what that word means, either. The list gets longer...
Of course it was. The premise of the paper was genetic mutations leading to rapid evolutionary changes, was it not?

So mutation rate is a critical component, is it not?
 
The part that answers my question.

I asked: do you have a mechanism for "practically complete idea emerges"

You wrote:


That seems to mimic Darwin and his gradualism. Where is this complete idea?
Post the whole reply and then you might be able to comprehend it.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom