View Single Post
  #4   Report Post  
Old 15-06-2004, 05:08 PM
Ian Stirling
 
Posts: n/a
Default flaw in Darwin Evolution grafted rootstock

In sci.physics Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

14 Jun 2004 07:48:46 -0700 Christopher Green wrote:
(snipped)


No, it may have a much greater viability with a "bird gut dependency".
Seeds that require a pass through a digestive tract, or a fire, or a
freeze and thaw are generally also well protected and will survive
harsh conditions in dormancy. They will receive better dispersal or
germinate under better conditions, and so will end up with a greater
yield.

--
Chris Green


No, this is a flaw in Darwin Evolution theory. Your above is another example of "postdiction" of Darwin
Evolution. This particular flaw is that of "generalist" versus "specialist" and that when a plant or
animal becomes too specialist faces the quick road to extinction. If you look at the record of species
gone extinct it is replete with specialists, seldom any generalist.


However, evolution does not work to long-term species survival, but
comparative advantage between offspring.
If in the past a certian behaviour or characteristic has benefited the
species to go into being a specialist, then the species may become very
specialist indeed, and sensitive to the loss of whatever they specialise
in.

Evolution cannot look ahead, and wonder what happens if the Goobly tree
becomes extinct due to Dutch Goobly disease, and there are no
Gooblyberries to eat.