Animals with traits that are beneficial to the environment can live longer and potentially contribute more to the gene pool.
The latter is all that matters (biological fitness, or how many viable offspring are produced) in natural selection. Lifespan and any greater purpose (benefit to the environment) are not applicable.
As I see your revision it seems you are more careful in describing NS, but does your view on NS escape being a tautology?
Since contributing to the gene pool is the only definition you give, it either has no result (the author calls that a 'lame' definition, since it isolates the proces of NS so that it no longer tries to explain evolution), or the result is a difference in the gene pool (that is: a difference in the frequencies of genes) after one or several generations, and then we have a tautology again.
Natural selection
- 06/08/2011 03:51:26 PM
982 Views
selection for suitability
- 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
633 Views
Thanks for your responce 
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
747 Views
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
747 Views
I can't speak for LadyLorraine and won't try, but here's how I see it:
- 06/08/2011 06:49:49 PM
679 Views
Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
681 Views
Yes it can
- 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
556 Views
But how?
- 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
750 Views
Re: Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
770 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
- 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
657 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
682 Views
Then it is still a tautology
- 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
695 Views
You can know it's beneifical to a particular individual, but it's harder to say for populations.
- 06/08/2011 10:18:16 PM
790 Views
Maybe...
- 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM
641 Views
I'm more inclined toward his logic, but possibly toward your conclusions.
- 09/08/2011 12:45:46 AM
730 Views
we can't really know ahead of time what makes a specific trait benefical in that environment
- 09/08/2011 06:16:02 PM
793 Views
As I understand it
- 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
624 Views
Better...
- 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
609 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
- 06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
743 Views
yes. I did not really phrase that very clearly. *NM*
- 09/08/2011 06:14:11 PM
293 Views
No biggy; from what Bram said, I underestimated how well you were understood anyway.
- 09/08/2011 06:45:16 PM
672 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that
- 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM
691 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify...
- 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM
731 Views
The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM
727 Views
Re: The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM
702 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM
733 Views
How many equation's has Moraine screwed up? 
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
303 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
303 Views
100% I think Moriaine is a very beneficial trait that contributes a lot to the RAFO pool *NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
323 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
323 Views
Re: Natural selection
- 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM
699 Views
Thanks a lot
- 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
842 Views
2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
619 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
830 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
644 Views
My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
678 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
616 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
765 Views