Response
Because living animals and other organisms are very complex and delicate (like high-tech machinery), massive random changes will destroy an animal, not give it an advantage.
Many (probably most) evolutionists actually agree and disregard the “saltation hypothesis,” 1 instead saying that evolution works through small changes over time rather than through sudden leaps.
Site Under Construction
This site is still under construction. It needs more references, citations, and debate arguments. If you would like to help, please view the community page.
Sources
Dawkins, R. (1996). Climbing Mount Improbable. New York: Norton.
Notes
- Dawkins, 1996, p. 98: “Evolutionary theorists have sometimes suggested that major saltations are incorporated into evolutionary change in nature. … But Goldschmidt’s theory has never been widely supported, and there are general reasons for doubting whether macro-mutations or freaks really are important in evolution. Organisms are extremely complicated and sensitively adjusted pieces of machinery.”
p. 91: “The message from the mountain is threefold. First is the message we have already introduced: there can be no sudden leaps upward–no precipitous increases in ordered complexity.” ↩