yes he wrote the first book about it too but if you want the truth about where you came from read The Bible
Mutations are the material upon which natural selection acts. Evolution is a two sided coin. One side is mutation; the other side is natural selection. Without mutation there is no significant variation. Mutations are, however, ubiquitous. Every organism is a mutant. Evolution can be summarized as the non random survival of randomly varying replicators.
Evolution has no direction. I think you are asking about medicine ameliorating the effects of natural selection as portrayed in this terminology. " Survival of the fittest. " Biologists have never been too comfortable with that term because the ultimate coin evolution pays in is reproductive success, which is a somewhat different thing than just survival. Just because someone is kept alive by modern medicine does not guarantee this persons reproductive success. To launch tour genes into the gene pool is the " goal " of existence and not only do you have to survive long enough to do that your genes must be well represented in the future populations gene pool.
SCISSEL
"Coin's Financial School"
The only coin evolution pays in is reproductive success. Having two children who leave no offspring would not give you an advantage over having one child who leaves many offspring. Or any combination thereof. Twinning is a developmental thing of egg doubling or fraternal twins being just like siblings. So, the act of twinning would not seem to confer any more advantage in and of itself, but twins having successful offspring that drive many parental genes to fixation in a population of organism would be reproductively successful that way.
Charles Darwin was put on the 2009 two pound coin.
The sociologist who first described society as the survival of the fittest was Herbert Spencer, not Charles Darwin. Spencer applied Darwin's principle of natural selection to human societies, coining the term "survival of the fittest" to explain social change and progress.
No. This is a common misconception that natural selection will not eliminate the " weak " id we medically ameliorate their problems. This misconception is even held by some biologists. Actually, the coin evolution pays in is reproductive success and natural selection can be a creative force to that end. Evolution is the change in allele frequency over time in a population of organisms and the " stunted path " concept implies progress in evolution, but evolution does not care about progress, only reproductive success. If alleles change frequency in populations of organisms, which they do, evolution is not being " stunted, " whatever that means.
Reproductive success is the coin evolution pays in.
It depends which one you mean. A lot of countries issued commemorative coins for the wedding, but I'm going to stick my neck out and assume you mean the commemorative crown struck by the Royal Mint.If it's in cupro-nickel - £2.00Cupro-nickel in the original presentation folder - £3.00Silver proof - £25.00
In England
25
A coin issued by the Jacobite pretender Charles Edward Stuart (Charles III)
Insufficient information, please describe the coin.
It was the first time Prince Charles head appeared on any coin or medal. Worth a bit now but will increase in value if he becomes king, or dies
Bullion value only.
The coin could be anything from a Penny to a Crown. I expect it is difficult to describe because the inscriptions are in Latin and barely legible. Take your coin to a reputable coin dealer for a positive identification and valuation.