61 replies to this topic

[Kazyumi]

Lately I've been seeing a lot of weird animals appearing in the news.
Like: the cat with wings: http://petsitusa.com/blog/?p=347
The 4 legged duck: http://news.bbc.co.u...ire/6371901.stm

I guess these sort of things could be another reason to believe that evolution isn't so farfetched...

[Calamity_Jones]

Hmm, I know ducks have a rather unwieldy gait, perhaps this is nature experimenting with a more suitable locomotion, give it a few hundred thousand years and daffy duck, walking on two legs with hands, might be a reality

[olli]

sexual absurd wow explain that caspa i see you edited your post to change it

ive seen 2 headed snakes also. it just a random mutation in the genes and alleles of the animal cells, cause by mutations.

Now, in 1000 years time ducks presumabaly will still have 2 legs (of course if the human race hasnt wiped everything out)
this is because having 4 legs gives it no extra advanged. Natural selection occurs because animals with favorable characteristics survive and reproduce, passing on these characteristics.
if having 4 legs gave it an advantage, e.g swimming/runnning faster to avoid predators it would survive and reproduce and pass on these characteristics.

if an animal was born with night vision, and it was nocturnal it would have an advantage over the rest of the species, as it can see predators and prey.
then it would reproduce, pass on these characteristics and they spread around the species. animals we know to do were not like the millions of years ago, because somewhere along the line a mutation has happened which gives an animal something different. it was mutations that caused animals we know to do. every single animal evolves, as it is not yet perfect, execpt the crocodile.
believe it or not crocodiles are actually still living dinosaurs (or what every group they fall into in the jurassic peroid) they are perfect killling machines and over the millions of years they have barely evolved, execpt growing legs so they can lay eggs on land. they are examples of perfectedness in nature as a mutaiton in one crocodiles' cells has not produced an advantageous characteristic, so it died off with out any one knowning. it might of given it an extra toe or something else minor but they dont need to evolve any more, especially since thier top of the food chain. animals that evolve usually are prey, the predators only evolve in certain small ways to counter this.

Edited by olli, 29 May 2007 - 03:25 PM.

[Cheshire Fox]

So, theoretically, eventually, if given enough time, every species will eventually reach a point of perfection and stop evolving. Oh wait, that wouldn't happen because every time the predator perfects itself, the prey must compensate. I lied.

[olli]

yes theoretically, hypothetically, that could happen but we know that it wont, because of strange and wonderful anomalieis in nature.
the prey cant just "compensate" it cant just decide to eveolve. for example a fish cant just decide to grow wings so it can fly out the water or it can decide that it wants to grow a poisonous scaley skin so that when the predator eats it, it dies.

its all completey random. say for example this species of fish is getting eaten by a shark. and one day a baby is born. it might have an advantageus characteristic, because of a random mutaition. lets say it does have wings. it can fly out of the water to avoid the shark. (lets inore the fact it could get eaten by a bird)
so it may avoid getting eaten by a shark. then as it gets older it gets to breeding age, to pass on the characteristics, but before it breeds it dies of a heat attack or it suffocates. then that charcteristic just disappers. and it may take millions of years to apper again. not every mutation produces a good characteristic. Mutation produces completely random results. thats why it takes millions and millions of years. that fish could of be born with a diffferent coloured scale, or an extra tooth in its mouth. which bears no advantage.

and even if the predator and prey perfect them selves, it doesnt mean the prey wont still get eaten. it may have a developed a technique to get away from it e.g lets take a gazel and a cheetah. the gazel might run 20mph faster than the cheetah (if for some reason it evolved like that) but whilst its runnning it could trip over and fall, where the cheetah pounces on it and kills it.
or it could die of a heart attack running. there are all sorts of considerations to take in.

and if the predator perfects itsself, it doesnt mean thay all the prey will be eaten. some will escape and survive and breed carrying on the species.
lets look at predation in the animal kingdom-zebras and crocodiles.
i've yet to see how a zebra has perfected itself from escapign from a crocodile. like i said the crocodile is a near perfect example of nature. most of the time in a confrontation between a zebra and a crocodile the crocodile will win, because it can overcome the zebra. the crocodile will eat the zebra, but wont need to feed again until maybe 2-3 days later (possibley more) giving the heard the time to get away and breed some more zebras. that particular crocodile will only eat 1 hapless unluky zebra that comes too close to his water hole, from the whole heard. some times, dispite all the odds, the zebra will escape, due to a lucky and random factor. maybe the crocodile didnt have enough grip, orthe zebra kicked so much it kicked its eyes out....it is all possible. but it is un common and lucky. not to do with evolution.

the reason they survive is there vast numbers in the heard, breeding lots of baby zebras. so even if the predator has perfected in killing a zebra, the zebra is yet to counter that. maybe it will grow wings, who knows how evolution will work.

Edited by olli, 30 May 2007 - 09:20 AM.

[Cheshire Fox]

No I realise that, I just meant that evolution will never end and organisms will never perfect themselves, as a perfect prey becomes imperfect once the predator becomes more perfect. I know evolution isn't intentional.

[Sparrkie]

the cat pic, i swear wot the hell has bin put in2 the cat food
and the duck, i suppose it could get bread faster than any otha, bt no other use

bt i suppose most ppl know caspa on here, well need i say anymore

[Sparrkie]

I dont believe in u Caspa, so ur not gettin my soul
*singing* ur not gettin me soul, ur not gettin me soul

anyway 2 ur comment im not tryin 2 call u a mutant, u r a mutant

Edited by Sparrkie, 30 May 2007 - 08:22 PM.

[Viper Of Hades]

he may not be callin u a mutant Caspa he may have meant "evolutionarily advantaged"

[Sparrkie]

he may not be callin u a mutant Caspa he may have meant "evolutionarily advantaged"

well first things first, im female not male, jst 2 let u no
and ive changed my mind, Caspa is not a mutant he is "devolutionarily advantaged"
basically someone took a shit in his gene pool

[Viper Of Hades]

woow sh*t srry dudette, trust me 2 get it rong!
lol. but that does point out that you are calling Caspa unique (just like everybody else)

[olli]

No I realise that, I just meant that evolution will never end and organisms will never perfect themselves, as a perfect prey becomes imperfect once the predator becomes more perfect. I know evolution isn't intentional.

evolution occurs because of mutations. which are causes by radiation and chemicals. if we wipe the cause of mutations completely off the planet. theoretically, scientificall, hypothetically...etc etc evolution would stop. but of course im sure some other weird and wonderful thing would happen, something that nature decides to throw at us.

[Hostile]

That's why evolution is a theory. Because it can't account for drastic changes in the developement of species. Things just don't grow extra limbs because of something called "common ancestry"

Even if that duck had baby ducks, they'd still have 2 legs. Excess legs are caused by imbalances of certain hormones during the embryo formation. Not genetically.

Evolution fails to explain the formation of multiple limbs to even start with. How did dolphins evolve echo detection? Some mutant dolphin sent out a sound wave and recieved it and passed it on to ALL the other dolphins through breeding it's genes? Impossible if you understand biology.

They won't teach you that in school...

I'm not getting into this any further. I'm staying out of this one.

[duke_Qa]

i would also consider that alot of inbreeding has to happen before a mutation can work. not that i have any solid proof for it but its a hypothesis.

when a mutation manifests it rarely comes up in more than one creature at the same time. the chances of having two mutations come at the same time in different families of the same species seems extremely small(naturally if they live in the same environment and the environment is the cause of the mutation thats a different story).

but if one imagine a mutation that gives one creature a large amount of offspring because he is better at what he is doing than the rest of the bunch, wouldnt the genes to pass on that trait need to be in both the female and the males genes? this would be very hard if the original mutant is the only one with the mutant genes, so it has to spread down a few generations.
the genes might be lying dormant in some, while being dominant in some other creatures genes. the few who have manifested the mutation have more offspring than those without, and even though they get some children without the mutation manifested, they have the genes dormant and makes the next generation more likely to manifest the mutation.

if this goes on for like 10-30 generations, the gene pool should have been mixed up enough for the mutation to manifest up to 100% of the time, if it was a very viable genetic trait to have.


though I'm not a biologist, and its getting close to bed-time, i would say that i might be onto something here

[Hostile]

That's why evolution is a theory. Because it can't account for drastic changes in the developement of species. Things just don't grow extra limbs because of something called "common ancestry"

Even if that duck had baby ducks, they'd still have 2 legs. Excess legs are caused by imbalances of certain hormones during the embryo formation. Not genetically.

Not exactly true. The offspring MAY have 2 legs or they may have 4. The excess legs are due to e genetic mutation, possibly caused by hormonal imbalance (not gonna debate the reason of mutation here). Never the less, that characteristic would be part of the ducks genetic makeup. If the genes that cause the extra legs were dominant, the offspring would have that characteristic too.

Evolution fails to explain the formation of multiple limbs to even start with. How did dolphins evolve echo detection? Some mutant dolphin sent out a sound wave and recieved it and passed it on to ALL the other dolphins through breeding it's genes? Impossible if you understand biology.

Close but you're not quite there yet. Let's use your dolphins as the example here. You're right, one dolphin with a mutation wouldn't be able to pass it's mutation on to ALL other dolphins. It's mutation (if part of a dominant gene) would be pass onto it's numerous offspring, who would then pass it onto thier numerous offspring. This would eventually result in many mutant dolphins having a distinct advantage over the rest. The mutated dolphins would be able to compete much better against the other dolphins which would see a speeded increase in the population, whereas the non-mutated dolphins would lose out in competition and be slowly breeded out and weined out of the general population.
Evolution isn't something that happens overnight, it takes a great many generations to establish and develop a mutation.

Sorry to tell you but the excess limbs are not caused by genetics. They are caused by hormonal imbalances during the development phase of the embryo. You can learn about particular mutation by reading:
http://armandleroi.c...ooks/index.html
It explains in finite detail how scientifically multi limbed orgamism accidently grow additional limbs. Be aware, it's professor level reading. So it can be hard to understand, I had to reread many parts and research the net to grasp it.

This hormonal imbalance NEVER reflects as genetic material that is tranfered to the offspring. You cannot pass this to your offspring. You can however pass on true genetic mutations such as:
http://www.ncbi.nlm....m.cgi?id=600095

So while I understand there are genetic traits that can be passed down through mutuations. Growing NEW limbs is not one of them. I'm not meaning to split hairs here, but I do understand some on biology.

And about those dolphins? I don't think you read my quote clearly.

Evolution fails to explain the formation of multiple limbs to even start with. How did dolphins evolve echo detection? Some mutant dolphin sent out a sound wave and recieved it and passed it on to ALL the other dolphins through breeding it's genes? Impossible if you understand biology .

So one of the flaws (of many) I'll point out is that extra limbs don't just show up!
Why:

1) Organisms don't just grow extra limbs and pass them on to thier offspring. It's a scientiffically proven fact. Mutated limbs yes, extra limbs no. Because extra limbs aren't caused by a change in the genetic material that is able to be passed on...

But if it's scientifically proven that this doesn't happen, than how did organisms eventually grow additional limbs? We don't know and that's why it's an unproven theory.

2) organisms do not mate with other organsims that do not appear to be genetically superior. Mutations are, by nature, degenerative. No matter how hot Storm from Xmen looks, organisms do not tend to mate with mutants, especially obvious ones like "additional" body parts.

This is also strongly scientifically proven. Do you think Paris Hilton would mate with a person simply because they had two penises? No because organsims seek out other organism that portray the best example of thier own DNA. Scientifically proven.

I don't believe the world was made in 6 days or any of that nonesense. I do believe in science. But the theory of evolution is just that. A theory. Interesting idea, but not the answer as of this point in time.

[Paladin58]

organisms do not mate with other organsims that do not appear to be genetically superior. Mutations are, by nature, degenerative. No matter how hot Storm from Xmen looks, organisms do not tend to mate with mutants, especially obvious ones like "additional" body parts.

This is also strongly scientifically proven. Do you think Paris Hilton would mate with a person simply because they had two penises? No because organsims seek out other organism that portray the best example of thier own DNA. Scientifically proven.

About that first one; perhaps the mutation manifests itself through so many generations of offspring, just because it isn't noticed by the mates, and by the time the mate learns of the mjutation, it's too late? I'm drawing on a bit of the movie Gattaca here, but in that, the main character disguises himself as one of the genetically elite of a future society where perfect = supreme. It just happens to be that the main character isn't genetically enhanced, he's just a regular person like everyone else who isn't genetically modified at birth. However, a woman that he falls in love with doesn't know this, and they do the horizontal mambo. If we followed the woman, and, say, she got pregnant without knowing that he had the potential to have children that would be genetically inferior to the point where they could die faster than their peers, due to a heart defect possibility.
Even though it's the exact reverse of what we're talking about, it shows that even though most animals find mutated mates to be bad, they must find that they are mutated first. It doesn't have to be so obvious as a third leg, or a second set of genitalia, but mutations can come around to being like that, given time. I don't believe any animals have any special abilities to scan DNA for imperfections, then choose to procreate afterwards. And, no offense Hostile, just pulling some of the stuff I observe at school out for the world to see, just happens that this is one of the subject I enjoy.

Also, I don't think the man with two penises would want to mate with Paris, the whore that she is.

[olli]

Hostile, yes you are correct that evolution is a theory.

but its the most bloody accurate theory ive heard. more believeable than a religious explanation
no one else has come up with a better theory or solution, so thats what we take as fact, until it is disproved. no one can really answer evolution questions with fact. what i was describing and saying was based on the theory.

but how would a female dolphin know that her male mate was a mutant? because she wouldnt know he can send out Sonar waves, as she cant detect them. then if his mutation is dominant, most of her offspring will have the same ability, and then they have offspring, passing on characteristics etc etc and eventually the whole dolphin population has it.

[CodeCat]

That's why evolution is a theory. Because it can't account for drastic changes in the developement of species. Things just don't grow extra limbs because of something called "common ancestry"

I think you're getting words mixed up here. A hypothesis is a 'try' at a theory, something that is still under construction basically. However, a theory is something that's supported by evidence, and accurately describes the world around us up to a degree. A theory is the highest level of truth that science has, basically. Science has no absolute truth.

Olli hit the nail right on the head here. A theory will never explain everything, and all theories have small discrepancies that are unaccounted for. But that doesn't make the entire theory invalid. It just means the theory is incomplete. With my experience with linguistics, I've noticed that quite often, languages evolve through regular changes in sound patterns. But sometimes, there's just one that doesn't fit.

A classic example (if you want to know more) is the exceptions to the sound shift known as Grimm's law. These were later accounted for in an extension to the theory, named Verner's law. So while the original theory fit most of the time, the inaccuracy was later also accounted for, and the resulting theory was accurate near 100% of the time.

So Hostile, what you're basically criticising is that science isn't fast enough for you. You're saying they should work faster and harder to account for the discrepancies in existing established theory. Good luck with that. I don't see you doing much to help them, though. Except tell them to hurry up, that is.

You know, if you said that to a mod leader, you'd get scolded from all sides.

[Viper Of Hades]

evolution is clearly too complicated for us to understand

[CodeCat]

So was electricity 300 years ago.