I am proposing that there is a difference between beneficial mutations and innovative mutations.
I’ll bite. What is the difference? Why can’t beneficial mutations accumulate to provide an innovation like flight evolving in bats?
I don’t need to model it Bill. We have both the genetic and fossil evidence showing how the evolution of flight in bats happened. What is your explanation for the evidence?
Bill Cole forgets the feedback from selection part of evolutionary processes, Episode #5,626.
Show me a model where this process is innovative.
Bill Cole plays dumb and ignores the hundreds of examples he’s already been shown, Episode #6,744.
Science builds and tests models. If you want to get your claim beyond the untested hypothesis stage this is the road.
Bill if you still think evolutionary theory is at the “untested hypothesis stage” you’re just too willfully ignorant to help.
Damn Bill science has known about and tested models of evolutionary processes for close to a century. You’ve been shown them dozens of times. Why do you always have to play Dory and keep wasting everyone’s time?
Do you really not understand the problem here? How do get the sequence inside an animal that can build an eye from a prior animal that does not have an eye? Whats the mechanism and how do you know it works?
You can start with Dawkins weasel model.
Thats a fine definition but it does not explain innovation; only change. Innovation requires specific change.
Winning the lottery requires having specific numbers, yet people win by randomly choosing numbers. The same thing applies to innovation.
Winning the lottery where the number of tickets is approximately the same as the odds of drawing the number and building an eye by generating more than a million changes to a sequence are not equivalent events.
Unless you find a deterministic process you cannot model the claim. Joshua is on the right track with genetic recombination as a possible mechanism.
So how many beneficial mutations are possible in a given genome? How do you calculate those numbers? If I gave you a genome sequence, would you be able to show us every possible beneficial mutation in that genome? If not, your claims here are meaningless.
How many tickets are there among the millions of mutations across the millions of generations of millions of organisms in each of the millions of species that could have evolved eyes?
Why specific? Why not any non-specific change which is beneficial to the organism’s survival?
The problem has always been your willful ignorance Bill. It has been demonstrated many times eyes/vision can evolve in step-wise fashion through small incremental changes each generation.
These are questions you need to answer to help build a model.
That’s completely false. YOU are the one claiming the probabilities are too low, so YOU need to build this model.
You also need to explain the difference between beneficial and innovative mutations. You have yet to do so. You claim there is a difference, but you can’t even say what it is. WHAT IS IT???