Larry Moran wrote:
> On Sat, 22 May 2004 02:26:53 +0000 (UTC), 
> Anon.  wrote:
> 
>>Larry Moran wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 20 May 2004 23:28:56 +0000 (UTC), 
>>>Phil Roberts, Jr.  wrote:
>>
> 
> [snip]
> 
> 
>>>>Yes.  But with the exception of Gould, most theorists consider
>>>>natural selection to be the prime mover of evolution.  So for
>>>>me its always been a moot point.
>>>
>>>In terms of total amount of evolutionary change, random genetic
>>>drift is the main mechanism of evolution, by far. Almost all
>>>evolutionary biologists know this.
>>
> 
>>Doesn't that depend on how you measure evolutionary change?
> 
>   
> I suppose. One could presumably eliminate or ignore some kinds of
> evolutionary change in order to make natural selection seem more
> important.
> 
> 
>>At the sequence level, I would agree (well, until someone shows
>>me some evidence to the contrary).
> 
> 
> Okay. So, if we take into account ALL evolutionary change then you
> agree that random genetic drift is the most important mechanism?
> 
I think I can still use my same question: Doesn't that depend on how you 
measure evolutionary change?  It's not clear to me that we have to 
measure it at the sequence level.  If we measure it at the phenotpyic 
level, we get a different answer.  Most paleontologists will probably 
take a phenotypic view, most geneticists will take a sequence point of 
view.  Both are, I think, equally right, unless one defines organisms 
purely as their sequences.

Bob

-- 
Bob O'Hara

Dept. of Mathematics and Statistics
P.O. Box 4 (Yliopistonkatu 5)
FIN-00014 University of Helsinki
Finland
Telephone: +358-9-191 23743
Mobile: +358 50 599 0540
Fax:  +358-9-191 22 779
WWW:  http://www.RNI.Helsinki.FI/~boh/
Journal of Negative Results - EEB: http://www.jnr-eeb.org
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 5/23/04 5:16:43 PM