Science Forums 2

[HydrogenBond]

Here is an evolutionary observation that doesn't exactly fit the existing Darwinian logic. Humans, especially in western cultures, have been getting taller over the past centuries. This was not due to a tall person having the most babies and gradually shifting the population in that direction. It is due to diet shifting genetics almost globally. The food environment (input) has created a type of cross the board potential for change in the genetics of both high and low breeders. This is not traditional ID, but it is caused by human intelligence creating a global environmental change (diet) leading to a type of global genetic change.

All my siblings are taller than our parents and grandparents. This genetic change, in one generation, has little to do with Darwinian. It is more in line with the collective change within the entire culture. Almost all my friends I grew up with, had the same affect. It has little to do with Darwinian mythology. There is a direct cause and affect relationship connected to an environment potential (food input) leading the direction of collective genetic drift. It wasn't the tallest male parent breeding all the mothers.

Say this casual global height change had happened in an animal population from 10 million years ago. We find a fossil or two that shows animal x got taller within a thousand years. The Darwinian explanation would say: this taller animal x had a selective advantage. Maybe it could reach food better. This caused this particular mutation advantage to breed more, gradually shifting the entire population to get taller. It would be totally off the mark, but would be accepted as real. The discontinuous fossil data would appear to verify this theory. To suggest cause and affect, would label you as crazy.