Posted by Pohl on November 24, 1998 at 23:27:25:
In Reply to: Another answer posted by rpcman on November 24, 1998 at 10:54:49:
: : Thanks for answering my question. If you can answer a couple more, it would be great.
: If you make your questions more specific it will be easier on us. Even easier (on us at least) would be to read a couple of introductory texts on the subject--perhaps starting with Darwin himself. For instance, I think one of your questions had to do with evolution being "progressive". Evolution is only progressive if you define "progressive" to mean that organisms adapt to their (frequently changing) environment. Stephen Jay Gould wrote an entire book on the subject. Evolution doesn't mean that bacteria change into humans and the bacteria then disappear (necessarily). Speciation events are continuously happening. Depending on the environment (and a few other factors) the original species may remain relatively unchanged over the generations while the new species may have different demands placed on it to change or go extinct. Evolution is a bushy tree--not a linear progression.
: Anyway, hopefully this helps. Like I said, you're better off reading a few books first and then formulating specific questions to any unanswered items.
Thank you for that answer and least not being so impatient as Xavier. I guess he expects me to accept all his theories without analyzing each point and counterpoint (sometimes hard to find)in excruciating detail. This takes time. And yes you are right, it would help if I read a bunch of books on evolution. So I will not ask any more questions of you anymore until I can save the money to buy the books or find the time to read in the library. It is just that I majored in mathematics and accounting in college and not biology. Further my interest are as numerous as the stars (my latest is investing in biotech stocks). Anyway as to your answer.
It just seemed that Hawkins was suggesting that the end of an arms race meant there would be a clear winner. And in that case I thought he would be better off using the human population as an example, since our population has increased consistently since its inception. But I got your point.