Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Fowler
I am not expecting to understand all. But I see it as a major impediment to evolution as the best theory that such systems defy a basic premise. Basically, as I understand it, evolution maintains that as species change thru any number of stimuli--from chance to radiation to whatever, that those changes which benefit the species are maintained thru natural selection--meaning that the change made that variant more successful in life. So how does a partial evolution of a complex system benefit the species? That is all I am asking. How does a gland that secretes a poison of any use if there is not duct to carry it to where it is useful? The example applies to ANY complex, inter-related system. Its "magic talk" to expect that "someday we will understand". Its a very basic part of the theory, and I fail to see how it works, even at my, most basic level, of comprehension.
|
Evolution need not be useful per se. It can just be a mutation that does nothing beneficial for example. Furthermore, if it does harm in the long run, a species can still get by and get to sexual maturity and reproduce and perpetuate its species...which can be a very short timespan for the majority of the earth's flora and fauna. Evolution doesn't function on a simple, linear scale.
Honestly there'd be a lot less debate on evolution if people actually knew what it was. It doesn't help that the usage of the word "theory" in science is different than it is for a layman.