Posted: May 22, 2012 7:17 pm
Mister Agenda wrote:asyncritus wrote:
It depresses me to realise that someone of your undoubted intelligence cannot get to grips with the simple fact that Lamarckism is rampaging unchecked in your (and their) expositions.
If the leptocephali of eel A successfully migrated say 500 miles to the north of the Sargasso, grew up some where and then returned to Sargasso ( floating at 3000 feet depth in an ocean current of some kind) and then died, then THEY COULD NOT PASS THAT ACQUIRED INFORMATION DOWN TO THEIR OWN OFFSPRING who would then have to start from scratch all over again. Why? Because the adults are all as dead as dodos. And because as we all should know, acquired information CANNOT be inherited. PERIOD.
The glass eels of the next generation could go no further than the 500 miles, if that - because they cannot receive any guidance from their dead parents.
So a 3000 mile northward migration, with a return a few years later is inexplicable on any grounds which are not polluted by our Chevalier.
Looking ahead, it seems you have had some trouble processing the replies made to this assertion, so I will try to make mine short and simple:
Eels are not perfectly homongenous. Some will travel a little farher, some a little less. If their spawning zone is getting farther away, the members of any given generation of eel that travels farther (without overshooting) will have more reproductive success than eels that travel less far. No Lamarkianism required, just plain old natural selection. More surviving larvae from the ones that made it to the spawning area. less from the ones that didn't.
Yes. One wonders why so simple a concept can give the man so much trouble. Of course, since asyncritus doesn't actually have any arguments for why this won't work(he certainly haven't offered any) all he does offer is denial, caricatures and fake mockery("You're kidding right?" etc. etc.)
As I experienced earlier, even children were finding his methods transparent.
