I would claim that quantum phyiscs is more important towards understanding reality and everything that exists within the universe, including natural selection or self organization or evolution. It might even be more important to understand evolution in our own universe, considering how bp mutations take place on a molecular level I can bet some day in the future we will be examining how QM affects evolution as well.
Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been... you wouldn't propose that because of QM we don't need the theory of evolution and it's thus invalid.
No more than you would do the same with QM and Chemistry.
True but most allele frequencies change over a long time. I thought the only way a multicellular species can adapt is if they already have a set of genes which have accumulated and can adapt to the environment?
Allele frequencies change with each generation... in some species this takes a longer time than in others.
When the first organism produced it's first offspring with a mutation allele frequencies started to change in the population.
I'm not arguing against Darwinian natural selection, just against the notion that a system only adapts to it's environment based on the chance mutations it posesses. The more positive mutations, the more offspring it produces. The fewer positive mutations, the more likely the system ceases to exist. If a system has the intrinsic capacity for plasticity and not for random mutations conferring fitness, then it makes it a valid theory especially if it has evidence backing it up.
Modern Evolutionary theory doesn't say that the only way that animals adapt to the environment is through random mutation, it's one of a few ways. So I'm confused as to what you are arguing against now.
Mutations are how novel alleles are introduced to a population, but it's not the only source of adaptive fitness that Natural Selection acts on. Nor is Natural Selection the only way that alleles change over time.
So if you aren't arguing over the old Darwinian version of evolution, I'm not sure what you are trying to debate on.
wa:do
