My paid employment means that I spend significant numbers of hours each
day looking at DNA sequences, and the relationship between the DNA
sequences of different species, from single celled bacteria through to
homo sapiens.
This shows, beyond a shadow of a doubt that the species 'evolved' from
one through to the next in a way that is normally described in short
hand as 'Darwinian Evolution'. I am nevertheless always more than happy
to discuss the details as to the mechanisms by which the DNA changed
during that process, and the relationship between DNA sequence and form,
as there are many unanswered, and extremely interesting, questions to be
asked.
The basic tenet of Darwian Evolution still holds. It is possible that
Darwinian Evolution is to the final evolutionary theory as Newtonian
Physics is to the final physics theory incorporating quantum theory and
relativity. Newtonian physics is not wrong, just not the complete
picture. Ditto Darwinian evolution.
Nigel
On 29/12/2012 10:06, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Axil, I think you mentioned this before.
The question is, is this trait really a trait from the dinosaur? Or is it
simply a trait of the chicken that laid dormant.
For one thing, we don't really know what Dinosaur traits there are. It is
irresponsible to say a specific trait belongs to dinosaurs. We don't know
that. It could simply be part of the trait of the chicken itself.
People ascribe these traits to dinosaurs only because they first assume that
chickens evolved from dinosaurs. But that is just a theory springing up from
our assumption that Darwinian Evolution is correct. We can not assume
Darwinian Evolution is correct then speculate that traits in chickens belong to
dinasaurs and then turn around and say the this is proof of Darwinian
Evolution. That is circular reasoning.
The most probable thing is that these traits in these so called "Junk DNA" are
actual coded traits of the Chicken DNA that laid dormant. During microevolution, some of
these traits are expressed and the chicken changes. The changes are conferred by what is
already in the DNA. Microevolution, not Darwinian Evolution. Big difference and people
always confuse the issue. They think that just because we see changes, that that
automatically imply Darwinian Evolution is occuring. Yes, evolution is occuring, but not
Darwinian Evolution.
Jojo
