“Random” doesn’t mean “coin flip” If one thing has a .9 probability of happing, it’s still random. If it has a .1 probability, it’s still random. Random doesn’t mean “equal chance of happening or not happening”.
-
-
Replying to @Jewthulhu @Woman4W and
No, but it does mean that as time progresses, chances of a detrimental mutation remaining goes to 0, while the chance of a beneficial mutation remaining goes to 1.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NathanielHart72 @Jewthulhu and
Not a bit of it. Plenty of detrimental mutations don't actually affect reproductive fitness, so they don't go anywhere. Plenty of beneficial mutations have an energy cost that doesn't translate into increased reproductive fitness, so they disappear again.
2 replies 0 retweets 22 likes -
Replying to @iridienne @NathanielHart72 and
Even the idea that there's an objective definition of "detrimental" and "beneficial" that stays consistent over time is obviously projecting our values onto the uncaring universe
2 replies 4 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
Evolution is only even *possible* because there's a certain baseline level of diversity in alleles made possible by ongoing random mutations that stick around for long periods of time
1 reply 2 retweets 29 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
People get the timescale twisted in their heads, like the existence of the allele has to happen well before the actual event causing selection happens If it didn't happen until then it would be too late, there'd be nothing to select
1 reply 1 retweet 24 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
This concept was mocked by anti-Darwinians as "hopeful monsters" because, again, they didn't grasp the timescale involved (a fish egg hatches a lizard that starts to drown but makes it to land just time?!?)
1 reply 1 retweet 26 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @iridienne and
But that's what most mutations are like Oh, some humans are melanin deficient, and that's bad because skin cancer, but it's also kind of good because vitamin D, so it's a wash People start living indoors most of the time and skin cancer is now rare? Hey awesome
1 reply 1 retweet 23 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Woman4W @arthur_affect and
Chemo has not existed on evolutionarily relevant timescales.
3 replies 0 retweets 14 likes
And neither did vitamin D supplements, although the need to consume vitamin-D-rich foods like dairy to stay healthy is theorized to be why white people evolved lactose tolerance
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @LizardOrman and
But to be serious about it for a second, even pale people who've spent most of their lives working outdoors in the sun rarely get skin cancer early enough that it affects their chance at having kids From an evolutionary standpoint that's all that matters
3 replies 0 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @LizardOrman and
Is that the benefit for lactase persistance? The extra calories seem pretty potent.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.