OK. Evolution is not"random". Evolution happens through natural selection which is about the least random process you can imagine. The mechanism for organisms to change is in fact random mutation, but by far the majority of mutations are either neutral or non-adaptive and die out. So those few random mutations that are adaptive survive and propagate. This may, to people like Mims, make them seem magical, but to most biologists they're just common sense.
I agree with your general inputs and conclusions. However, I think that Mims is correct, in a sense.
"The evolution of these complex molecules, which had to exist in the earliest cells, is so improbable..." --Mims
Yes, it is improbable, on a small-scale, and that seems to be where Mims' analysis has stopped.
"If enough random things happen and the beneficial things survive, then not only is the evolution not improbable, it's almost inevitable given enough time." --parent
Total misrepresentation of Evolution (Score:5, Insightful)
OK. Evolution is not"random". Evolution happens through natural selection which is about the least random process you can imagine. The mechanism for organisms to change is in fact random mutation, but by far the majority of mutations are either neutral or non-adaptive and die out. So those few random mutations that are adaptive survive and propagate. This may, to people like Mims, make them seem magical, but to most biologists they're just common sense.
Mims writes: "The evolution of these complex mol
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, it is improbable, on a small-scale, and that seems to be where Mims' analysis has stopped.
Yes indeed.
I found Mims' statement
Re: (Score:3)
billions a day for a billion years.
Of course it's just a new way of using the junkyard example.
Example of their ignorance to be precise.
Re:Total misrepresentation of Evolution (Score:3)
I had to look that one up. Is it this?
Hoyle's fallacy, also known as the Junkyard tornado [rationalwiki.org]