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
1204 Views
selection for suitability
- 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
842 Views
Thanks for your responce 
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
970 Views
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
970 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
913 Views
Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
925 Views
Yes it can
- 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
775 Views
But how?
- 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
989 Views
Re: Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
1010 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
- 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
902 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
947 Views
Then it is still a tautology
- 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
946 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
1019 Views
Maybe...
- 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM
890 Views
I'm more inclined toward his logic, but possibly toward your conclusions.
- 09/08/2011 12:45:46 AM
950 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
1012 Views
As I understand it
- 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
843 Views
Better...
- 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
845 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
- 06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
960 Views
yes. I did not really phrase that very clearly. *NM*
- 09/08/2011 06:14:11 PM
381 Views
No biggy; from what Bram said, I underestimated how well you were understood anyway.
- 09/08/2011 06:45:16 PM
880 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that
- 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM
921 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify...
- 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM
933 Views
The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM
968 Views
Re: The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM
938 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM
978 Views
How many equation's has Moraine screwed up? 
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
400 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
400 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
427 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
427 Views
Re: Natural selection
- 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM
942 Views
Thanks a lot
- 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
1081 Views
2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
825 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
1048 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
870 Views
My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
922 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
844 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
1001 Views