Well a lot of people have been telling me evolution is real. They give me the most craziest surreal 'facts'. Has anyone discovered any fish with legs? Any humans with gills or fins? If you put all the pieces of a watch into you're pocket and shake it around for trillions of years, will it ever become a watch? Is there but one possibility? Or if you completely dismantle a chicken and a fish, and put it into a box, shaking it around for trillions of years. Will it ever become a fish with wings? or a chicken with fins? :l
That's not how evolution works. It was one of the earlier proposals on the means by which evolution functions but was found to be false. Use does not mean it will evolve that.
I don't want to debate about creation and evolution or whatever. I will just ask some questions a few times about different subjects. My first question is more related to the idea of Lamarck.
According to Lamarck's theory, a given giraffe could, over a lifetime of straining to reach high branches, develop an elongated neck.
But, is the giraffe the only animal that would want to eat from the high branches? Doesn't a goat want to eat from these leafs too?
So my question is; why did the neck of a giraffe develop, and that of other animals didn't? Goats need to climb on trees to eat from these leafs. Why didn't the neck of a goat develop?
So my question is; why did the neck of a giraffe develop, and that of other animals didn't? Goats need to climb on trees to eat from these leafs. Why didn't the neck of a goat develop?
Lamarck's theory has already been dismissed, so why try to prove it now?
So my question is; why did the neck of a giraffe develop, and that of other animals didn't? Goats need to climb on trees to eat from these leafs. Why didn't the neck of a goat develop?
Do goats and giraffe live in the same enviornment? Anyway, my guess would be because goats don't need to. They eat grass right? And if they could climb the tree, then thats another soultion that doesn't require a long neck.
Lamarck's theory has already been dismissed, so why try to prove it now?
Oh, didn't see that. Sorry.
Do goats and giraffe live in the same enviornment? Anyway, my guess would be because goats don't need to. They eat grass right? And if they could climb the tree, then thats another soultion that doesn't require a long neck.
Why didn't the giraffe begin to eat grass then? And, with climbing to a tree I meant this. But that still doesn´t give an answer to my question. But, it doesn´t matter any more. The theory of Lamarck is BS and has been dismissed, as nichodemus said.
well " genetic mutation" i just the gamma rays altering DNA. but this altering is extremely slight. if the genetic change is god then it lives.. but there is also a differance in genetic mution and just genetics
and too adda to that when humans breed wolves be mated the ones who were the fastest, over a coures of hundreds of years and BAM he have ifferent species of dogs,, there was no genetic mutation just getetic breeding
Giraffes don't have long necks to reach leaves. On QI it says that they have long necks for fighting with to win the female giraffe to reproduce offsprings with. And they didn't evolve long necks like homo sapiens (us) evolved intelligence, they already had long necks from the start of their existence. They then used them to win the female because they already had randomly long necks. There are so many species of animals that one of them was bound to have unnecessarily long necks. Anyway they don't pass their environmental changes onto their offspring, else babies would be born with ear and naval piercings which would be weird. Evolution is because of genetic mutation and natural selection, not Lamarck's theory. His theory isn't stupid. It's just that at that time that was what the ongoing theory was till Darwin disproved it. Then the distinctions between genetic mutation (like X-Men) and Lamarck's theory (which is incorrect...).
Now you said it, I have another question too. Is there any positive genetic mutation? I know of neutral mutations and negative mutations. But is there any, positive genetic mutation?
Okay. Lets say there are two type of Apes. zthere are the kind like gorillas that we see, and there are these other apes who are skinny and weak and are sorta bald. So far the gorillas are dominant and they're so strong that they can just kill whatever animal tries to attack them. The other apes though, are being killed constantly. They are too weak to defend themselves. But, they learn to use weapons, to defend themselves, to fight, ect... They travel away from their enviornment with their weapons into a colder place with less sun. Now they need more hair and less melatonin in their skin. They need to use their brain to make clothes from animal hide to stay warm. They need to learn to control fire, to start civilizations, you get the idea. The gorillas didn't need to evolve to survive. And sometimes, when animals need to evolve but can't, they just die out.
Um...rofl... You still didn't answer my question.. why do we still have apes -_-
Because the apes, humans, chimpanzees, rhesus, lemurs, and other primates are all descendants of common ancestors, which arose from other common ancestors. To put it as simply as possible, because these species are under different environments and have different conditions to survive under, they evolved differently. It makes sense. They don't all have to follow the same path, they have their own strengths to use.
Then you have migration that we talked about a page or two earlier. I'll just reiterate that, since some users don't feel like looking back. When species migrate from one land to another, it's natural and obvious that the conditions in their environment are going to be different. In the new environment, the population within that species that are much better suited to surviving inside it are going to last longer and thus breed more. Natural Selection in its finest.
They are. Every single organism that lives is undergoing Evolution. No *sudden* changes are recordable, because the change is so very minute and subtle. We can only see what has changed if we look farther back the evolutionary line. From now to 10,000 years ago, or an even greater effect if we look from now to 100,000 years ago.
Exactly... No recordable changes.. the image I tried to post didn't work.. but it was a ape with an M16.. Still how would they just suddenly know how to shoot a gun..
They are. Every single organism that lives is undergoing Evolution. No *sudden* changes are recordable, because the change is so very minute and subtle. We can only see what has changed if we look farther back the evolutionary line. From now to 10,000 years ago, or an even greater effect if we look from now to 100,000 years ago.
