Matt Jensen wrote:
> The rest of your (interesting) comments focus on external influences, but
> I think you're also dead on here that the smaller-than-expected number of
> genes in the genome adds a new argument against the "evolution is highly
> improbable" position.
There's no "evolution is highly improbable" position. This is a variation
"a protein can never fold, since it can't sample it's conformational
landscape within the age of the the universe" bogus argument.
Well, it can. Because it doesn't have to.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 29 2001 - 20:26:06 PDT