Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Limits of Darwinism hinted at

Categories
Darwinism
News
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

From “For certain orchids, relatives more important than pollinators in shaping floral attractants (Eurekalert, October 26, 2011
Public Release: 26-Oct-2011),

Bees, bats, and moths follow their noses in search of food from flowers. Plants that rely on such animals for pollination often produce particular chemical scents that attract specific pollinators. However, the ability to produce certain chemicals is also determined by a plant’s genetics, or phylogenetic history, which can potentially limit its ability to respond to pollinator pressures. So which is more important in the evolution of floral scents: pollinator-induced natural selection or phylogenetic constraints?

“While the results of natural selection, or pollinator-mediated selection, generally produce the most fascinating examples of evolution — such as the extraordinarily long spurs of the Angraecum orchid (Darwin’s orchid) and the equally extraordinarily long proboscis of its hawkmoth pollinator — many characteristics are shared between closely related species simply as the result of their common ancestry, and it is important to be aware that this common ancestry can have a strong influence on the outcome of natural selection,” Steiner says.

Which is as much as to say Darwinism cannot do what lobbyists claim, no matter how many profs set up a pack bark in the lecture room. No matter now many Darwin lawyers go to court, no matter how many politicians pledge their faith in Darwin.