On Nov 25, 2007 3:58 PM, giovanni santost <<a href="mailto:santostasigio@yahoo.com">santostasigio@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>Along the line of what we were discussing sometime ago about evolution and randomness, here some interesting reading:</div>  <div> </div>  <div><a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071119123929.htm" target="_blank">
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071119123929.htm</a></div>  <div> </div>  <div>It is claimed that underlying process of evolution is not randomness but instead deterministic processes.</div></blockquote></div>
<br>The actual study made no such claims, they said that <u>developmental</u> evolution <u>in the nematode vulva</u> occurred  <u>primarily</u> through deterministic mechanisms.  <br><br>Basically, it was a claim that when ways to form a single, already defined structure are evolving, only two of forty factors were random, while the others were at least somewhat convergent.  
<br><br>See: <a href="http://www.current-biology.com/content/article/fulltext?uid=PIIS0960982207021938">http://www.current-biology.com/content/article/fulltext?uid=PIIS0960982207021938</a><br><br>All this has no bearing I am aware of on the "underlying process of evolution", which is neither inherently random nor inherently deterministic.
<br>