Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.
I don't think that makes the entire theory incorrect if you just cite the transmission of harmful genes. If there are other broad reasons, than maybe I'd believe it. And natural selction doesn't mean that no harmful genes will be floating around.
"Nothing says 'oops' like a wall of flame." -Marion Winik
1)the cambrian explosion as darwin saw invalidates his theory
2)NS is invalidated by the fact of speciation as NS only deals with traits already present and cant deal with the generation of new species
but NS cant as the generation of new species it not part of its remit
this sites definition of NS is
if a trait appears in an off spring which is not present in its parents then that shows ns is wrong as ns is about traits already present i being passed on
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo ... ection.pdf
transmission of harmful genes shows natural selection is wrong
http://filebox.vt.edu/cals/cses/chagedo ... ology.html
Genetic Disorders Common Among Hospitalized Children.
Genomics & Genetics Weekly
| May 25, 2001
The new findings and their potential implications were presented April 30 to the 2001 Pediatric Academic Societies and American Academy of Pediatrics joint meeting in Baltimore, Maryland.
Genetics say that genes are transmitted indiscriminately, you can't/don't select which gene to put in your egg or sperm. Therefore you'd always have transmission of certain genes regardless of harm/benefit.
So why is the gene still around? Obviously natural selection says we should kill all carriers of sickle cell anemia. Right?
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests