Sexual selection is a subcategory of natural selection
Dogyote
joined 1 year ago
Weaker is in quotes, which suggests to me they don't mean weaker, just those carrying potentially deleterious traits. Plus, if those people are reproducing, those traits can't be that bad anyway.
They never said nor implied that
You need to read a genetics textbook and then some evolutionary biology so you understand OPs question.
Pretty much everyone here either misunderstands how evolution works, or is willfully ignoring it to push their viewpoint.
Yes! Finally someone else who knows how...
Humans at this point have very little evolutionary pressure from natural selection.
Oh come on! Such a strong start but then you fell on your face. Natural selection is the differential survival and reproduction of individuals due to differences in phenotype. It never lets up. It's more about reproduction than staying alive. Natural selection is happening every time someone reproduces more than someone else.
Survival of the fittest doesn't mean what you think it means. Fitness, in the evolutionary sense, is a quantitative representation of individual reproductive success. So yes, the fittest of us do survive in the sense that their genes are passed on far more often than those that are less fit. For example, the overweight, nearsighted, diabetic car salesman with a lethal peanut allergy that has 16 children is more fit than most people on the planet.
Populations do not mutate. Mutations occur randomly within individuals, they do not occur to fit a changing environment, they only occur randomly. A mutation can spread through a population if nothing selects against it. Selection never waits, it's always there in one form or another.
Bro you did not understand anything he asked about
Why are you doing this?
Water can move freely across the membrane, but the stuff that's dissolved in the water cannot move across the membrane.
No? Water can't carry anything across the membrane.
About 6 montha ago I wanted to replace my S21 battery and checked with Samsung, who redirected me to iFixit. The only genuine Samsung S21 battery they had was only sold with the screen, which cost ~$130 or something. I didn't need the screen...
Last month I checked again and saw they had a third party replacement battery for ~$30, same capacity. I bought it and popped it in. It's been working fine.
Was it Samsung's requirement that the battery only be sold with the screen? At the time, I would have rather had the genuine Samsung battery and would have paid a bit extra for it, but not $100 extra.