[Someone1234]

> Err they don't. That's Lamarckism theory, and I wasn't aware there was even a shred of evidence towards it.

There is quite a bit from the last few years. Gene expression in particular is a field we continue to learn a lot about [0] and several studies have suggested Lamarckism might have some merit [1].

Saying there isn't a "shred of evidence" is just scientifically untrue. There is some legitimate evidence that limited information could be passed from mother to child prenatally.

Your post is the classic Dunning–Kruger effect. Few in evolutionary biology would be as "sure" as you are, and you get less and less sure the more you learn.

[0] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK43787/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism#Epigenetic_inherita...

[arielby]

Macro-scale evolution does not go through epigenetics, but mostly "knob tweaks".

[Someone1234]

Because, why? Why exactly can't large scale evolutionary change by powered by single mother-child genetic signals? That makes just as much or as little sense as claiming that evolution is powered primarily through a single random mutation.