Reverse evolution

[gabriel]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100501/national/whitefish_evolution_1

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/05/08/news-to-note-05082010#three

Canadian Press: “Survival of the Weakest? Study Looks at
Whitefish Evolution in Alberta Lake”
If the Canadian Press is to be believed, whitefish provide the
latest example of “evolution” in action. But as with previous
examples, the evolutionary significance is overstated.

A study of fishing practices and whitefish characteristics in
Canada’s Lesser Slave Lake has revealed an interesting case of
natural selection (or possibly artificial selection since man is
the cause). in action. University of Calgary evolutionary
biologist Sean Rogers plans to investigate changes in the genetic
composition of the whitefish population at the lake—which appears
to have come about as a result of human fishing.

Because fishermen use nets designed to catch the biggest fish,
smaller whitefish have a reproductive advantage—they are captured
less frequently and therefore have a greater opportunity to
reproduce and propagate their genes. “Instead of the bigger and
best surviving, those were the ones we were actually removing
from the population and consequently we elicited this selection
response in the fish population,” explained Rogers.

In fact, the whitefish example is a great illustration of the
workings of natural selection, an idea Charles Darwin both
adopted for his evolutionary idea and expounded upon. However,
Rogers points out that people often assume “survival of the
fittest” means that the biggest and strongest survive. While that
may often be the case, the whitefish example shows the opposite
process in effect. Rogers also discussed a similar study from
last year (which we covered last January) that showed other cases
of “reverse evolution” (i.e., animals whose average size has
dropped because of human predation).

What none of these examples demonstrate, however, is anything
remotely similar to Darwin’s molecules-to-man story for life’s
complexity and diversity. Darwin’s story requires the addition of
new genetic information into a population, which natural
selection preserves. But in this case and all other examples of
“evolution in action,” genetic information is either constant or
it decreases as natural selection removes certain members from
the population. So such cases really are “reverse evolution”—they
are the opposite of what drives Darwinian evolution.

[Bob LeChevalier]

Post by gabriel
In fact, the whitefish example is a great illustration of the
workings of natural selection, an idea Charles Darwin both
adopted for his evolutionary idea and expounded upon. However,
Rogers points out that people often assume “survival of the
fittest” means that the biggest and strongest survive. While that
may often be the case, the whitefish example shows the opposite
process in effect. Rogers also discussed a similar study from
last year (which we covered last January) that showed other cases
of “reverse evolution” (i.e., animals whose average size has
dropped because of human predation).

There is nothing "reverse" about such evolution.

Post by gabriel
Darwin’s story requires the addition of
new genetic information into a population, which natural
selection preserves.

Wrong.

Post by gabriel
But in this case and all other examples of
“evolution in action,” genetic information is either constant or
it decreases as natural selection removes certain members from
the population.

Nonsense.

You have no clue what "genetic information" is.

lojbab
---
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
***@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org