I just don’t understand why you are so fixated on the term “badger”. It was proxy terminology … to refer to a fierce small mammalian carnivore… a topic that was raised (though not specifically mentioned in connection to badgers) here (see link below for DCSSSSS posting in another thread):
I thought I had used the term “badger” in this thread (link above) - - but it looks like I was only thinking “badger” because it looks like I was the first to use the term … and right here in this thread.
But you seem to be the ONLY one who thinks my mention of badges was supposed to be LITERALLY interpreted. Can you give it a break? Even Eddie didn’t jump me with the use of the term - - he borrowed the term himself. I’m sure he doesn’t think Whales come from Badgers either.
I RENOUNCE ALL INTEREST in Badgers. It was a terrible mistake of mine to use the term. Badgers are Nothing … I SPIT on badgers.
Are we done now?
Now …as to the INTERESTING part of your recent postings:
"The point I’m making is highlighted on slide 33: “Genetic polymorphism provides a much greater source of genetic variation than do the relatively few new mutations that arise each generation.”
I believe I’ve already AGREED that this “genetic polymorphism” provides a greater source of variation … but I ALSO said that I was more interested in what would by definition be the SMALLER category of genetic variation: “new mutations”.
But, Ben, if you have a good exemplar where two separate species have the net mutations separating them QUANTIFIED . . . and mostly polymorphism also QUANTIFIED … well, then let’s get to it. Let’s DISCUSS THAT…
If you DON’T have a good exemplar … PLEASE GET OFF MY BACK … and let’s discuss WHATEVER IT IS THAT DOES separate mammalian species.
(I am raising the specific topic of mammal speciation because I’m thinking it would be more relevant than lizard speciation … but I’ll go to wherever or whatever has the best evidence to discuss.)