I just explained it. What part didn't you understand?Interesting but not an answer to my question, do you have a mechanism for "practically complete idea emerges"?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I just explained it. What part didn't you understand?Interesting but not an answer to my question, do you have a mechanism for "practically complete idea emerges"?
Can you prove that?Darwin's mechanism of gradual changes leading to speciation does agree with the observed data from his time aboard the Beagle.
So then you believe that punctuated equilibrium has no basis whatsoever? Do you understand what stasis is?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.
PsychobabbleThe premise of mutation rate says otherwise.
Stasis says otherwise.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.
Lie.Stasis says otherwise.
No. The basis of the paper. That you never read.Psychobabble
And we know for certain that your idea of the same mutation happening simultaneously across many individuals is absurd.
Moving on...
Oops, more lies.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.Oops, more lies.
Irrelevant, red herring, childish whining, psychobabble from someone who never read and doesn't understand his own link.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.Irrelevant, red herring, childish whining, psychobabble from someone who never read and doesn't understand his own link.
Yeah, repeating vapod psychobabble doesn't exactly make it better.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.
Oh look, it's the uneducated slob who is terrified to take his nonsense to the big leagues.And believes that if greenhouse gases increase the temperature will increase despite there being evidence to the contrary.
View attachment 576210
I keep repeating arguments you have no answer for.Yeah, repeating vapod psychobabble doesn't exactly make it better.
That wasn't an argument. Wow, you don't know what that word means, either. The list gets longer...I keep repeating arguments you have no answer for.
Says the guy who can't explain why a 120 ppm greater concentration of CO2 led to a planet that was 2C cooler.Oh look, it's the uneducated slob who is terrified to take his nonsense to the big leagues.
The part that answers my question.I just explained it. What part didn't you understand?
In the case of evolution the mechanism would be mutations which lead to functional advantages.
Of course it was. The premise of the paper was genetic mutations leading to rapid evolutionary changes, was it not?That wasn't an argument. Wow, you don't know what that word means, either. The list gets longer...
Post the whole reply and then you might be able to comprehend it.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?