Re: AAT: Req for alternative
Glenn A. Friedrich (glenn@lexgen.com)
Sat, 06 Jul 1996 16:53:46 -0500
Elaine Morgan wrote in article <CheetahPRO_v0.04_3839@desco.demon.co.uk>:
[...deletia...]
: It [Morgan's "mosaic scenario"] also looks dodgy because
: the kind of habitat it envisages is precisely that presently occupied by
: the Gombe chimps, and they don't show any tendency to walk bipedally
: more often on the grass than in the trees,(on the contrary) nor any
: tendency to become more hairless,. nor to get overheated because they
: are not hairless.
This statement betrays a poor understanding of how evolution works. In
essence, you suggest that bipedal locomotion and hairlessness are
_necessary_ adaptations to a certain niche. This isn't obvious at all. But
whether it is obvious to us or not is irrelevant. The only consideration
that matters are what changes happened to occur by chance, and whether
those changes happened to allow some differential reproductive success and
therefore become fixed in the population. There are no goals to
evolutionary change -- no "tendencies". It is expedient and constrained by
the malleability of the starting material and the winnowing of natural
selection.
Perhaps you know this and I'm misunderstanding the section quoted above.
If so, apologies in advance. If not, I'd be glad to proof your next
popular science book.
Regards,
--Glenn A. Friedrich
|