No, natural selection definitely happens a lot. We see change across populations now because of birth rates. All I’m saying is that it is not a path that leads from a common ancestor of chimps and humans to humans. I feel like Sanford beat that point to a pulp such that I don’t understand why you guys don’t take it seriously and instead start talking about experiments in bacteria. Yes, I know natural selection is super efficient in bacteria and they probably don’t undergo GE in most cases just functional change. That doesn’t actually prove his point about human evolution because his model doesn’t require a UCA!
Well, I’m glad we’re on the same page or at least in the same ballpark (to mix a metaphor) regarding the fact that natural selection happens in humans, at least.
Not to belabor the point, but I hope you can understand the source of my confusion when you said the following:
Bacteria probably aren’t really subject to GE, and humanity had far too low of a population size in the past in the current theory for selection to be possible.
No one should take him seriously because his claim is based on taking numbers that don’t pertain to reality and running them thru a program that cannot possibly come up with any results that would be inconsistent with his claim, no matter what numbers one inputs .