Hi Chalks, I guess you must hear some distressing stories in your job.
Your life slows down as you get older, I think this gives you more opportunity to reflect and ponder.
When you repeat the same random direction 176 times, I think it would constitute habitual behaviour. If it randomly mutated say ten times in the same direction, you might say there was a certain amount of luck involved. When you repeat 176 steps in the same direction; that seems to push the meaning of both luck and random.
Understandable.
I think this is where you would need some natural change to happen, so random mutation would would change course and happily go another 362 steps in another direction. The lens would then need another five changes in direction to make up the 1,829 incremental steps. Evolution says that random mutation and selection have no goals, but this process does seem goal driven to me.
The eye lens would have evolved in the seas, I can't think of many natural forces in the sea that could affect change. There are currents moving chemicals around, changes in temperature, changes in light, possibly lightening. What else would cause random mutation to change direction? And we have not mentioned how optic nerves, the brain and muscles would need to adapt at the same rate.
I truthfully do not know why Nilsson and Pelgar wrote this paper, because in their summing up they say. 'One would expect most eye lens to be useless without advanced neural processing and this being relayed to the muscles'. By their own admission they know how flawed their research is. What I struggle to understand is how this research is seen as important by others, and they don't question the gaps.
Hi Eric
I do hear some distressing stories in my job,
There are quite a few people that have fallen on hard times that were quite happy and settled a few months ago, people that are not used to deprivation.
I also see the good side of humanity, the number of people donating money, food, time, vehicles fills my heart with joy.
Two hands hands helping, is better than a 1000 hands praying.
How are you getting by, do you have people around you, helping you out ?
When you repeat the same random direction 176 times, I think it would constitute habitual behaviour.
The mutations are random, but the selection process is not, natural selection, always selects what is beneficial.
So the direction ( whatever direction that is ) is the direction that is most beneficial.
We only see the results of the beneficial selections, all the others are out bred or die.
Evolution says that random mutation and selection have no goals, but this process does seem goal driven to me.
It’s true, there is no goal, it’s a blind process
The mutations are random, offspring differ slightly form their parents, who differ slightly from their parents etc etc
It’s these slight changes, and how they effect the organisms to preform in nature ( pass on their genes determine what gets selects )
The lens probably did evolve in the sea,
Even if there were no environmental impact on the organism, there are still genetic difference between parent and offspring