A
Atreju
Guest
The mechanism is exactly the same. spruce and banana are pretty distantly related but I challenge you to draw boundaries. Can a mango tree and banana tree each evolve from a common ancestor bearing soft fruit?
Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true
- Status
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Can an individual piranha morph into a cold-water fish? Of course not.
If the selective pressure is gentle enough to not quickly kill the species, can a group of piranha evolve into your cold water fish? Absolutely.
That’s essentially what has already happened. Believe it or not, your Canadian fish and that piranha already share a common ancestor. Their great-great (add a million more “greats”) grandad was the same fish, which was likely neither a piranha nor a cold-water fish.
If the selective pressure is gentle enough to not quickly kill the species, can a group of piranha evolve into your cold water fish? Absolutely.
That’s essentially what has already happened. Believe it or not, your Canadian fish and that piranha already share a common ancestor. Their great-great (add a million more “greats”) grandad was the same fish, which was likely neither a piranha nor a cold-water fish.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Yes, they died evolution didn’t see it coming and made them fit ahead of time.
Last edited:
P
ProdglArchitect
Guest
Probably not, they started from different base points.
I mean, given a slow enough transition it’s theoretically possible, but the banana tree is an offshoot from shrubs that initially developed in tropical zones, whereas spruce trees developed in the colder regions from plants that were more suited to the cold.
More likely, if the environment changed enough that an area that previously supported banana trees becomes capable of supporting spruce trees, the banana trees would just die out and the spruce would develop from a different set of trees / shrubs that migrate in from an already-colder climate area.
I know what you’re trying to ask, and the answer is yes, it’s possible, but that’s not really how it works.
I mean, given a slow enough transition it’s theoretically possible, but the banana tree is an offshoot from shrubs that initially developed in tropical zones, whereas spruce trees developed in the colder regions from plants that were more suited to the cold.
More likely, if the environment changed enough that an area that previously supported banana trees becomes capable of supporting spruce trees, the banana trees would just die out and the spruce would develop from a different set of trees / shrubs that migrate in from an already-colder climate area.
I know what you’re trying to ask, and the answer is yes, it’s possible, but that’s not really how it works.
A
Atreju
Guest
Are siberian tigers and lions the same “kind”? Why is it impossible for a cold-dwelling fish to evolve from a warm-dwelling fish but possible for a cold-dwelling tiger to evolve from a warm-dwelling large cat?
A
Atreju
Guest
Is this… is this what you think biological evolution is? that evolution will “see it coming and make species fit ahead of time”?Atreju:
Yes, they died evolution didn’t see it coming and made the fit ahead of time.
Last edited:
E
edwest
Guest
Yes, that’s true.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Mango trees produce more Mango trees, and Banana trees produce more Banana trees, the common ancestor is pure speculation.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Bananas are a great example, actually.
Before humans selectively cultivated them (so artificial selection rather than natural selection), the fruit contained a lot of large, hard seeds that made eating it unpleasant.
They’ve been cultivated to promote genetic traits we like and eliminate genetic traits we dont like.
Evolution in action, baby.
Before humans selectively cultivated them (so artificial selection rather than natural selection), the fruit contained a lot of large, hard seeds that made eating it unpleasant.
They’ve been cultivated to promote genetic traits we like and eliminate genetic traits we dont like.
Evolution in action, baby.
T
Techno2000
Guest
How does evolution make anything fit for a new environment when it takes evolution millions of years to do anything?Techno2000:
Is this… is this what you think biological evolution is? that evolution will “see it coming and make species fit ahead of time”?Atreju:
Yes, they died evolution didn’t see it coming and made the fit ahead of time.
Last edited:
E
edwest
Guest
That’s not evolution but selective breeding. If selective breeding was not possible, the old bananas would be the only type available.
A
Atreju
Guest
Well, when an environment changes rapidly, most species do go extinct. We see that. but when an environment changes gradually, those species already most suited for the new environment evolve traits that make them even more fit for the new environment. If you actually watched the videos I posted earlier this would be very obvious. I’m actually amazed you aren’t understanding how this works and am tempted to suggest you’re trolling.
How do you suggest some species survived the ice ages? The environment changed dramatically during that time.
How do you suggest some species survived the ice ages? The environment changed dramatically during that time.
Last edited:
A
Atreju
Guest
Why can human selection produce genetic change but natural selection can’t?
V
Vonsalza
Guest
They’re the same thing.
Your selective breeding IS evolution. Where people have placed artificial selection forces on bananas, they change.
Nature does the same thing. A place gets hotter. Colder. A new rival species moves in.
Natural selection IS selective breeding.
Your selective breeding IS evolution. Where people have placed artificial selection forces on bananas, they change.
Nature does the same thing. A place gets hotter. Colder. A new rival species moves in.
Natural selection IS selective breeding.
E
edwest
Guest
No, it’s not. If the bananas could not be modified due to built-in genetics then they would not be. The various show dog breeds is another example. If the genes won’t allow it, it can’t be done.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Then the species goes extinct.
This is the fate of 99.9% of the species that have roamed the planet.
Species death is the norm. That’s why almost none of the things living today are found in the fossil record.
Things that existed 100 million years ago are all gone. And things that exist today didn’t exist 100 million years ago.
Living fossils are the exception, not the norm.
This is the fate of 99.9% of the species that have roamed the planet.
Species death is the norm. That’s why almost none of the things living today are found in the fossil record.
Things that existed 100 million years ago are all gone. And things that exist today didn’t exist 100 million years ago.
Living fossils are the exception, not the norm.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
“Why are dinosaurs gone” and “why are there no fossils of people” are good questions you need to answer if you want to suggest a theory better than evolution.
Last edited:
A
Atreju
Guest
Are you suggesting that all dog breeds are genetically identical?
V
Vonsalza
Guest
I promise, Ed, if someone ever produces a fossil of a human being that’s as old as a tyrannosaurus, I’ll join your cause. Until then, evolution is a more rational explanation for how people got here.
E
edwest
Guest
If the genes cannot combine successfully then they can’t. There are two birds in the United States that cannot breed. They look the same but nothing happens should an accidental attempt occur.
- Status