Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)

  • Context: Biology 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yo yo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether evolution is constant, with participants exploring various arguments and interpretations of the term "constant" in the context of evolutionary processes. The scope includes theoretical considerations, examples from biology, and critiques of the question's phrasing.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that evolution is the ability to adapt, suggesting that if evolution were not constant, species would not survive changing climates.
  • Another participant critiques the phrasing of the question, stating that evolution is a noun and cannot be proven as a rate of progress, questioning the meaning of "constant."
  • Some participants mention the existence of research on varying rates of evolution, implying that evolution may not be constant.
  • References to Stephen Jay Gould's theory of "punctuated equilibrium" are made, indicating a perspective that evolution occurs in bursts rather than at a constant rate.
  • Examples of ongoing evolution, such as the color changes in certain moths due to environmental factors, are suggested as evidence of continuous evolutionary processes.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of classic examples of evolution, such as the peppered moth, with critiques of the experimental methods used in studies.
  • Discussion includes the role of human pathogens as a potential example of ongoing evolution, emphasizing the need to distinguish adaptation factors.
  • Another participant proposes that the mechanisms of evolution, such as natural selection and reproduction rates, are constant aspects of life that contribute to ongoing evolutionary processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some suggesting that evolution is constant while others argue that it is not, leading to an unresolved discussion with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the question's wording may lack clarity, and there are concerns about the assumptions underlying the interpretation of "constant" in relation to evolutionary processes.

  • #31
WWGD said:
Wouldn't " ongoing" here be more accurate than " constant "?
because it can vary?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
The word 'constant' indeed does not goes well for a spinning dice...
 
  • #33
I think we have to go back to the original question and consider what is meant by the word evolution in biology. We are usually talking about genetic changes in a population over time and there are in fact a number of things that influence these changes. In fact very few of these things can be considered constant, yes changes occur in the genome's, but these changes usually copy errors, that occur at critical points in the organisms development, must be compatible with continued development and life, most aren't. The critical periods are important as the changes must be in germinal cells to be properly incorporated and become heritable. However for these changes to effect a whole population, they have to provide some sort of fitness advantage, these advantages are usually dependent on the environment at the time, these are the selective forces that most evolutionary changes act upon. I suspect that this complexity is what Rive is refering to as a spinning dice.
Its probably a mistake to talk about evolution as the ability to adapt, really this need to be clarified, its adaption in a particular environment. Bill mentioned the role of extinction, there needs to be some sort of ecological gap that can be filled or taken over for changes to become more common. In fact most genetic changes occur much earlier in organisms, and tend to be concentrated in specific parts of the genome, selection only occurs when a change becomes relevant.
Just for interest, in the messy genetics of the HIV virus its considered that there are already viruses in the wild that are resistant to every HIV drug, and in fact resistant to every drug that will ever be developed in future. There are also humans that carry a heritable gene variant, that occured as a copy error at some point in history, that has been identified as preventing HIV infection. Exposure wasn't necessary.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/246635/genetic-variant-linked-lower-levels-hiv/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
29K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
10K
Replies
5
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K