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.
