Walter Russell
Member
What do you think Natural Selection is, Russell?
Natural Selection is all "adapting" to the environment they lived in.
A change in geographical terrain or climate, the availability or scarcity of food, water or other resources, will require species to adapt to this changing condition, passing on the right genes to the next offspring or descendants, OR not adapt and future generations will die out.
The biological change don't need to be so completely different.
Darwin visited the Galápagos Islands, and seen at first hand, different subspecies on two different islands that are only a mile or two apart. And the most profound differences between the subspecies are that of the tortoises.
On one island (eg Santa Cruz), in which the island was rich in green vegetation and humid condition, all within reach by a much smaller tortoises with dome-shaped shells, short necks and limbs.
But on the other island(s), in which is more harsher in both terrain and dryer climate, vegetation are different, and higher off the ground. The giant tortoises here have saddle-shells, and much longer necks and legs than their smaller cousins. The shape of their shells allowed them to crank their neck vertically, and stretch their legs, so that they can feed off leaves that were higher off the ground.
That's evolution, or more precisely Natural Selection, at work.
Another good example would be bears. Why do the southern bears, eg brown bears, black bears, grizzly bears have different coats than the polar bears? Why do these bears hibernate but the polar bears don't? Different climates and geographical terrains, would require each adapting to their conditions and thrive. The polar bear have more insulating coat and fat in their bodies, which enable to hunt in the arctic region and swim in icy sea, something their southern cousins couldn't do. Somewhere in the past, the polar bears diverge from the bear species of the south. Again, Natural Selection at work.
With the virus example, I gave you earlier. That's partly Mutation and partly Natural Selection.
Mutation and Natural Selection are not the only mechanisms in evolution.
Another one is Gene Flow, in which the environment is not a factor. The change occurred when a new population breed with the existing population, producing offspring that are different from both, because the new generation inherited traits from both populations.
I forgot what Genetic Drift and Genetic Hitchhiking are. Don't forget I am not a biologist, so excuse me if I cannot define these two from the top of my head.
Veritable limited changes "adaptation" I have no issue with. The is all together different than information itself.
Nothing that crawled out of the ocean grow legs with the genetic information to build them in the first place. No creature took to the skies without already having the information to build wings.
Information=intelligence. There can be no information in species without sn intelligent creator putting it there. Plain and simple.
Science may have some guesses as to where information comes from but by your self proclaimed standard of proof, if purely speculation and unverifiable.
The limits of adaptation have long and clearly been documented.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not against evolution. I'm just showing you your clear bias as it pertains evolution vs Russells work which you so easy label speculation and toss aside without even looking at the evidence he has put forth.
Russells concept of the universe is more thorough and complete than the theory of evolution in my op.
