[extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity

[John K Clark]

<Ody777 at comcast.net>

 > But why did the does continue to choose the bucks with the
 > largest antlers?

Because it’s hardwired into her genes that enormous antlers are sexy.

 > Wouldn’t natural selection tend to eliminate this
 > contra-survival behavior?

It did eliminate this behavior, it eliminated it big time, they went
extinct.

 > Wouldn’t the does that preferred smaller antlers mate more often,
 > have more functional offspring, and thus pass on more genes?

Yes, a mutant female who thought smaller antlers were sexy would indeed have
an advantage, but advantageous mutations do not show up on demand; the big
antler liking gene drove the species into extinction before a favorable
mutation showed up that would have reversed antler race madness. A female
elk needs to judge, sometimes quickly, the health and fitness of a potential
mate; up to a point antler size is probably a pretty good standard for doing
that, but then things got ridiculous.

There is a parallel in our own species, for millions of years a gene that
told us to eat as much sweet and fatty foods as we can get our hands on
worked great for survival, but today food is so plentiful people become fat
and get heart attacks. We know it’s bad for us but it just tastes so damn
good.

   John K Clark      jonkc at att.net