Creationists have no problem with sexual selection concepts while rejecting natural selection for the origin of biological life.
Sexual selection in fact would confirm YEC ideas on a fallen world desperately striving against decay in order to allow rime for God’s redemptive plan. Biology grasping at a marginal advantage to beat a dying/decay attrition. A arms race in survival.
Secxual selection claims are fine but once again are they accurate? Are they really done well by those who don’t do well in figuring out origins and living equations in biology? i think not!
i watch youtube videos , well done, on sundry creatures. Recently i saw ones on the Tasmanian devil and the hyaena. Surprising information but suggesting quickly clues.
Instead of a sexual selection going on in the episodes of creatures in mating I discovered instead the creatures always are striving/selecting to maintain the group/herd/nation in its strengh. So when selecting for mates its just a minor extra episode of what they do all the time. they just in sexual union continue to maintain the reasons for why their is strong.
Therefore its not a strange , instinct, desire to improve/maintain genes. its not that sophisticated. they just continue to aggressively desire strength in the whole group. they just do it in mating also. So its not a special thing but a continuum in a spectrum of maintaing the groups strength.
So I might say sexual selection doesn’t exist but only is a special case in a spectrum of staying strong.
This makes more sense, to me, then a segregated , special, drive for special mating designs.
If that is the case then all evolutionists are dishonest for the same reason. Nice own goal
You can’t dumb down evolutionism any more than it naturally is. And evos say shit like science and religion are OK out of one side and then say they are incompatible out of the other.
And then there are the big lies like evolutionism can account for IC.
it looks silly and unintelligent to turn someones thread into their own threads of no intellectual merit.
Anyways nobody understands sexual selection concepts here. Instead folks presume to understand the more complicated things.
This is a hypothesis and i think it will one day replace old time sexual selection concept as a special operation.
I’ll try another idea soon enough.
Robert, your idea hits at the heart of theirs. Your idea of sexual selection says the norm is kept pretty much in check. That is what observations support. They can only counter with “well when we weren’t looking the “right” mutations happened and the girls just loved them!” 😎
But you are an admitted YEC who isn’t allowed to make a point. That’s life @ TSZ
I’m not even a biologist but…for the UMPTEENTH time, natural selection is not abiogenesis!
Right, abiogenesis is purely sheer dumb luck
Until you come across an equivocating evolutioinist. Then it becomes highly likely.