> > The fact is this: sex is *not* a problem for evolutionary biology.
> > Theories regarding why sex persists (a separate question from how sex
> > arose - which is also not a problem) are covered by any decent
> college-level
> > evolution text.
> >
> > Rich Kliman
> > Dept. of Biology
> > Radford University
> > *standard disclaimer*
> >
Yup. I'm taking biology 1 and it's right there in plain english. Not hard
to grasp or understand. It makes a whole lotta sense, scientifcally
speaking of course.
Some tidbits:
"Darwin's first point - that evolution occurs - can stand on its own,
whether or not natural selection is the cause".
(What vs. How)
"Natural selection involves interactions between individual organisms and
their environment, but individuals do not evolve. Evolution can be
measured only as changes in relative proportions of variations in a
population over a succession of generations."
Why sex is better than no sex (regarding survivability):
"On average, those individuals best suited to the local environment leave
the most offspring, transmitting their genese in the process. This natural
selection results in adaptation, the accumulation of those genetic
variations that are favored by the enironment. As the environment changes
or a population moves, the population may survive if in each generation, at
least some of its members can cope effectively with the new conditions.
Different genetic variations may work better than those that prevailed in
the old time or place. SEX and mutations are the two sources of this
variation."
All quotes from "Biology (4th ed.) by Campbell (Benjamin/Cummins Publ.)
