On 28/08/2014 10:38 PM, Jojo Iznart wrote:
My friend, caterpillars turning to butterflies are not
micro-evolution, that is normal development associated with butterflies.
You think I don't know that!? Why don't you read what I wrote - hint
look for the "If" at the beginning of the sentence.
*From:* jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au <mailto:jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:07 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Punctuated equilibrium
On 28/08/2014 6:22 PM, Jojo Iznart wrote:
On 28/08/2014 11:14 AM, jwinter wrote:
If the necessary information is present from the beginning, then
it only needs to be triggered and it will express itself. This
is my suspicion of how the process might work.
This process my friend, is called micro-evolution or variation or
adaptation. The genetic information required to trigger a change
is already encoded in the DNA. This mechanism can create large
changes in a short time. It does not rely on mutations. This
mechanism does not result in a new kind (~species). It does not
result in Macro-evolution.
_If_ a species of caterpillars _which reproduced as caterpillars_,
one day laid a batch of eggs out of which hatched butterflies
_which then reproduced as butterflies_ (which was my example),
there is no way that anyone in their right mind would call that
micro-evolution! Given that this profound level of transformation
occurs millions of times every day within a single generation of
many diverse species, it is _not a great stretch to imagine_ that
this level of transformation _could also have occurred between
generations_ in the process of speciation. My point is that the
information for a completely new life form can lie latent in an
existing lifeform to suddenly appear fully formed when the trigger
occurs - which trigger may in fact need a genuine mutation. But
no precursors or slow mutation and adaptation need be required.
Such a process would embarrass the evolutionists because they can
find no fossil record of transitional forms. It would also
embarrasses the honest creationists because all the dating and
genetics would point to the first species (caterpillars) giving
rise to the second (butterflies). If such a mechanism existed and
acted, it would be the perfect producer of the effect known as
"punctuated equilibrium" - and as I understand it, is what the
fossil evidence largely points to.
