|Community >> View Post|
Subj: Re: A response to Jesusfan.
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 at 01:51:30 pm EDT (Viewed 89 times)
Reply Subj: Re: A response to Jesusfan.
Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2017 at 03:32:48 pm EDT (Viewed 121 times)
Quote:I nwould agree with change within the species, as there was change from Lion/Tigers/Panthers etc, but once again, there has NEVER been shown in nature a transistion to another wholly different kind, as natural selection Evolution rewuires for it to work!
The issue here is what do you consider a species and why the change in one sort of thing is so different than another?
If I understand you correctly than you are asking for the observed change of say a dog into a cat or something like that. That is a misconception.
If you acknowledge the differences like you are than you are basically acknowledge the others too.
For instance, what would be recognized by cat is a very wide range of organisms. Things like bob cats, linx, tigers, lions and so on. We all see those as cats. However, not all of these cats are capable of breeding with every other. Meaning that they are separate species by the crudest definition in larger animals.
This is evolution at work and is an example of changing in one class of things, felines or felidae. This happens for varying reasons, but as each becomes more adapt they start to change to adapt to their environment.
Being a lion is not advantage everywhere for instance. Yet, all of these creatures are fairly closely related too, despite being distinct. We know this through fossil records, anatomy, physiology, genetics and biochemistry. They have a fair bit in common but are different animals. Sometimes a fair bit so.
Another example would be the domestic dog in some sense. And hang with me. They are from the grey wolf, or something near to what we have in modern times. We have breed a great deal of change into them based on our desire, inserting selection ourselves. They are still dogs, but unless we get involved some of these animals would never mate.
Just think of logistics between a great dane and a chiwawa. This would be something that if you just turned those two animals loose in the wild they would no longer mate at all despite being able to do so (hypothetically anyway) and eventually would become very different sorts of creatures. Both would still be dog like but they would gradually become different species despite being canines. It is similar to cats (although a hypothetical example to showcase).
Cat's and dogs share a common ancestor
A simple and easy to understand article on it. Really, many large carnivores do. How do we know this? Fossils and genetics allow it to be figured out fairly readily. They are distinct animals but close enough.
Through a changing world, various evolutionary mechanisms, geographic realities and so on there were changes.
Keep in mind that evolution takes a fair bit of time but it is not always as gradual as it may come off. What I mean is there are periods of more rapid change than others, this is still a fair bit of time but faster than would be expected otherwise. And there are various factors that lead into this.
I bring this up because it is important to consider that this is not a dog giving birth to a cat. It is a creature that was like dogs and cat's giving birth to its own kind. Those kinds spreading out and changing. These changes were gradual but eventually the two were not able to breed anymore and were different from the ancestor and the other offshoots.
They would be akin to looking at different types of wild cats for instance now. They just lead down different paths or die off. We often cannot see the full result in our life times for these organisms because our lives are short.
That said, we have seen it for plants, insects and microbes. The later we have the most on. Growing generations in very short periods when you consider doubling times of an organism like E. coli lab strains in some media can be as fast as every 20 minutes.
Look Raist bunnies...