Teach "Evolution," Not Darwinian Evolution

pretty creative idea, im not sure how mental energy could do that, but id love to hear an explanation. why the northern lights as well? auro borelis, is caused by gases not mental energy, althogh i guess you could argue that the brain waves transform into certain gases which exemplify colors. The difference between reality and dreams, is that durign a dream you wake up.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ravens and crows are, to my knowledge, interfertile. Like wolves and coyotes, crow genes have been introgressing into raven populations for some time.

And let's not mention "Noah's Ark"; the idea is too preposterous to bear contemplation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm not so sure that wolves and coyotes cannot interbreed. It might be just a habitat difference. Wolves, coyotes and jackals can interbreed with dogs and produce healthy fertile hybrids. Not sure about foxes: probably too much of a size difference to do it naturally, but nobody has tried artificial fertilization.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But humans are only animals, what happens when monkeys dream? or doggies?

What do monkeys dream about? maybe wishing they were human,

monkey: how could i be so unlucky stuck here as frickin monkey when my relatives are driving BMW's.

spidergoat: dont worry our brain's are just a little more developed.

monkey: but why were you born human and me a monkey,

spider: i jus lucky i guess.

monkey: what are the northern lights?

note: this is a talking monkey, partially evolved.

 

In evolution, the proportion of genetic diversity between population variations increases as the populations are geographically separated, but decreases as species are circumscribed into lineages of mixed populations. The proportion of genetic diversity within populations - inbreeding - depends on how much hybridization occurs.

Darwinian evolution should be taught at the initial level of education of evolution in any course as a historical perspective. Background historical perspectives are taught in all courses: philosophy, physics, economics, art, almost every subject that I can think of do the same for initial background education - a foundation to build on.

In reference to an earlier post: "We share 60% of our DNA with bananas." Does this not support abiogenesis, i.e., even beyond the advent of animals back to plants? There are hundreds, perhaps millions, of different strains of rice - the oldest cultivated crop on Earth. The rice genome contains 37,544 genes. Compare this to the 20,000 some genes in most mammals.

In reference to the earlier post: "Without bacteria we would be dead." Of course this is true, and countless scientific research studies have proved this. Bacteria are necessary to stimulate the development of our immune system defenses. They are also a source of vitamins, are necessary for the absorption of nutrients in our intestinal track, and are antagonistic to pathogens. When germ- or bacteria-free organisms are raised in isolation and then placed in a normal environment they become infected with relatively harmless microbial species and die.

In reference to "syngameon": Syngameon amongst species is a process of evolution demonstrated in the characteristics of all subspecies. At the level of subspecies, it is just a reshuffling of the gene pool. Not much different then earlier horizontal gene transfer following abiogenesis. When certain combinations appear in a significant frequency, we say that the animal has reached a certain level of "genetic stability," and a consequent gene frequency for a given trait that can then be distinquished from other subspecies. At the species level, cumulative genetic changes increase the magnitude of traits to the point where the subspecies are no longer able to interbreed.

Syngameon is an interbreeding among subspecies in a given species gene pool. According to Seehausen (2004), the "syngameon hypothesis" is that "After a radiation has progressed to a stage with two or more incipient species, occasional or localized hybridization between these species would facilitate further ecological diversification. Such syngameeon conditions would enable the rapid generation, by hybridization, of new adaptive trait combinations, which are suitable for utilizing resources that were not utilized previously, simultaneously preventing exhaustion of variation at quantitative trait loci under the strong selection associated with rapid adaptive radiation and sympatric speciation. Hence, hybridization would maintain and prolong the adaptive radiation momentum. Such a mechanism has recently been suggested to explain the rapid evolutionof mimicry rings in Heliconius butterflies. As the number of species increases and unexploited resources become scarce, selection as experienced by individual populations would change from directional or disruptive to stabilizing. The probability that recombinant hybrid genotypes find underutilized niches in which they enjoy equal or higher fitness than do their parents would diminish. The depression of ecological fitness of hybrids relative to that of parental types would tend to reinforce premating isolation. Hence, the frequency of interspecific hybridization would decrease and fewer hybrid genotype populations would become established as new species,whilst genomic incompatibilities would begin to accumulate between existing species. The same idea, however, also predicts that radiations might never reach this stage if the environmental conditions are unstable of if successively evolved innovations open up new niche dimensions, allowing for successive rounds of radiation.The syngameon hypothesis predicts that the volume (species numbers and functional diversity) acquired in an adaptive radiation depends not only on ecological opportunity and genetic variation, but also on the opportunity for occasional or locally restricted hybridization between diverging populations within the radiation, such as instrongly structured metapopulations that experience temporal and spatial variation in selection regimes." Seehausen, Ole. 2004. "Hybridization and Adaptive Radiation." Trends in Ecology and Evolution, Vol.19 No.4. http://www.fishecology.ch/publications/seehausen/Tree 2004 .pdf

 

Syngameons reach into the Genus and sometimes the Family levels on the current phylogenic tree, so this system has no inherent meaning, and should be junked for a system which reflects interbreeding ability, with syngameons being the lowest common denominator, not species, which obviously is a meaningless term.

 

You’ll still be stuck with the same sort of problems.

Do you draw the line around species that interbreed in nature, or do you include species that do not normally interbreed but could if you put them into an artificial environment? Do you exclude or exclude species that are genetically compatible but phenotypically incompatible?

You also have to consider cases where species can transfer genetic information without sexual reproduction (primarily bacteria). And what about dependent species that have separate genetic heritage but are entirely dependent upon each other?

The problem is clearly defined boundaries do not exist. Any method of classification will involve areas where the distinctions are blurry.

~Raithere

 

Behold, I am Spidergoat, and I can answer all your questions. For they did ask Him, what about the monkeys? Lo, the monkeys contribute to this conscious entity as well, but to a lesser degree. He did say it was so, and it was so.

 

If species is a meaningless term, then there is no barrier to a goat evolving into a horse. What Darwinian evolution mean to you, if not one species developing into a complete different one?

 

Since you apparently have read nothing of what I've written on this thread, why should I answer you?

 

Youre a fucking retard!

 

You're a silly buffoon.

 

Coyotes do interbreed with wolves and produce fertile offspring. This happens in close quarters at Pennsylvania's Presque Isle State Park. On the other hand, horses and donkeys can interbreed, but they produce sterile offspring: mules. So there is a certain genetic diversity distance that once reached cannot be crossed backover again in interbreeding between species.

 

Oh really? So if you tried to breed with an ostrich and you had fertile offspring (since you "acreeted function" from birds in the past) you would sprout wings and lay really big eggs? Oh goody. Please send me pictures of this! I can't wait!!!

Hey! It's fun to act like IceBrain! Try it! Good times!

 

Hey verydim, coyotes and dogs can produce offspring, let us know how you do with the ostrich.

 

I heard they crossed your mother with a monkey.

 

You are built for hearing, but you don't listen, that's your big problem.

 

Maybe I will listen once you actually mount an argument instead of dismissing everything as foolish.

You can start by explaining the fossil record. The relationship between genomes of different species. The research showing actual evolution in the lab.

otherwise just piss off. In fact I will start reporting every post you make from now on that doesn't consist of an argument. If you want to troll do it in the cesspool.

 

Dealing with you is like dealing in a cesspool, go clean your ears.

 

The fossil record, almost all of it, is the result of sand and clay and carbonates engulfing creatures, entombing them, and when the water drained off into the deepened oceans, the sediments dried around the creatures, billions of them, producing fossils, get it, bizarrochimp?