It seems to me that mutation of DNA combined with natural selection can only explain a tiny part of the whole process of evolution. The DNA is merely a blueprint for manufacturing proteins, not a blueprint for phenotype (observable characteristics of a whole organism).
As a comparison, think of blueprints for making bricks, planks and nails. That's the DNA in this analogy. Those blueprints only provide the design for elementary building blocks for an architecture. Similarly, the DNA only contains blueprints for proteins as the elementary biological building blocks.
Imagine a heap of bricks, planks and nails, and then put evolutionary pressure on that heap. Would the heap ever take the shape of a whole building, such as a house? The claim that mutation - regardless of whether it's random or guided - of DNA together with evolutionary pressure can over time shape entire species is overly exaggerated.
As a comparison, think of blueprints for making bricks, planks and nails. That's the DNA in this analogy. Those blueprints only provide the design for elementary building blocks for an architecture. Similarly, the DNA only contains blueprints for proteins as the elementary biological building blocks.
Imagine a heap of bricks, planks and nails, and then put evolutionary pressure on that heap. Would the heap ever take the shape of a whole building, such as a house? The claim that mutation - regardless of whether it's random or guided - of DNA together with evolutionary pressure can over time shape entire species is overly exaggerated.
via JREF Forum http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=268072&goto=newpost
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire