This study on 'snails and crabs' tries to prove that evolution has dictated some snails to have left handed shells that would make them survive, since crabs are right handed but can you spot how nature once again disproves evolution........? __________________________ Sinister secret of snail's escape By Richard Black Environment Correspondent, BBC News website Calappa flammea. Image: Noaa Right-handed flame box crabs find left-handedness hard to swallow Snails with left-handed shells can have a big advantage in life - predators may find it impossible to eat them. That is the conclusion of research just published in the Royal Society's journal Biology Letters. Scientists from the US examined whelks and cone shells preyed on by the crab Calappa flammea. They found the crab is unable to open left-handed shells because it only has a tool for peeling them on its right claw; so it discards them. "The crabs have a special tool on their claw, a tooth that's used like a can-opener," said Gregory Dietl from Yale University. "So, if you imagine trying to use a right-handed can-opener with your left hand - it's very hard to do," he told the BBC News website. Old food The fossil shells which Dr Dietl and colleagues used in their study date from between 1.5 and 2.5 million years ago. Reflections of nature Enlarge Image The scientists identified 11 whelks and cone shells which exist, or existed, in both right- and left-handed forms. "The best way to visualise it is to imagine you have the shell in your hand with the pointed end upwards and the opening towards you," said Dr Dietl. "If the opening is on the right-hand side, it's a right-handed shell or a dextral shell; if it's on the left, it's left-handed or sinistral." Many bear the scars of attempted evisceration by crab. Ten out of the 11 pairs showed higher rates of scars on dextral shells, suggesting that crabs are attacking them in preference to their left-handed counterparts. If you assume that left-handed and right-handed whelks and cone shells would be equally tasty, something else must be causing the crabs to prefer those of one orientation. In the behaviour of C. flammea, more commonly known in North American waters as the flame box crab, researchers found a clue. Sinister difficulties Typically a crab grasps a shell with the pointed end away from its body. With a dextral shell, this means the opening is on the right, and the special "tooth" on its claw can break in. But with a sinistral shell, either the opening is on the left, or it has to grasp the pointed end towards its body. Both solutions are apparently too much trouble; the crab acts like a vegetarian in a butcher's shop, and moves on. "They picked them up, and they just dropped them," said Dr Dietl. "If we left them for a long period of time they would probably figure it out; but in nature these left-handed shells are really rare." The evolutionary question is why these left-handed forms have remained so rare - some have even gone extinct - if they escape death by crab more easily. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Andrew Strauss. Image: PA Being left-handed may benefit cricketers like Andrew Strauss In humans, left-handers make up about 10-13% of the population; but in some competitive situations including such sports as tennis, cricket and boxing, they are much more prevalent and dominant than that figure would suggest. At the last cricket World Cup, left-handed batsmen scored more runs, batted for longer and were more likely to bat in the top of the order than right-handers. It is the relative rarity of left-handed batsmen which seems to confer advantage. One theory holds that right-handed bowlers struggle against them because they do not face them that often; if they did, they would learn how to get them out quicker. Presumably if left-handed marine snails became more common, crabs would eventually evolve apparatus or techniques for eating them, and their advantage would disappear. But that cannot explain why in some populations they persist only in extremely low proportions, about 1%, or why in others they have gone extinct; other factors must be at play. Sinistral snails apparently find it much harder to find a mate, and so may be doomed to remain rare or die out completely, whether or not they evade can-opening crabs. Shell images courtesy G Dietl/J Hendricks/Biology Letters http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4831218.stm
Well, if he was smart enough to see that, he would have. Also, left handed snails only get an advantage if the level of predation of right handers means they become more rare than left handers, before they have a chance to breed. If that isn't the case, and it clearly isn't, it doesn't make much difference.
You clearly don't understand the concept of evolution. There are no adaptations for a reason. They are random, most have no effect on survival My dad's wealthy but i still work you lazy son of a bitch
Humans were not evolved from anything. But however, both the Noble Quran and Science claim that animals were sent down to earth from space, and then developed into many physical shapes and forms. The idea of Evolution came from Charles Darwin, an English atheist scientist who lived in the 1800's in London, England. His parents were Christians. He believed that humans were originally animals; more closer to monkeys and Apes, then we developed and became more intelligent and formed the "human" race. He also had other theories that dealt with reproduction and other human-animal related topics. I won't comment much on Darwin's theories, because I don't know enough about it. But it is quite clear that the theory of Evolution has no support in Islam. Let us look at the proof: Allah Almighty created the first man of Mankind on Earth from scratch. He didn't evolve him from any other GOD's creation: "Behold, thy Lord said to the Angels: 'I will create a vicegerent on earth.'...(The Noble Quran, 2:34)" One comment I have to Darwin's Scientific Theories and Facts, and that is: Allah Almighty created humans and animals from Earth's dust: "From the (earth) did We Create you, and into it Shall We return you, And from it shall We Bring you out once again. (The Noble Quran, 20:55)" It is normal to find similarities in our Physiological Systems. My question to all of the Darwinists out there is: If your belief is true, then how come humans didn't develop into something more intelligent and physically different than us today? I know that we are much more technologically advanced and more knowledgeable than the humans that existed 3,000 years ago for instance. But if we originated from Apes and Monkeys, then what will be the advanced stage for us? Perhaps being born without fathers as it is done in cloning? This still doesn't prove that humans came from animals or vise versa. We are far more intelligent than animals. We co-existed with animals for thousands of years, and they have not changed a bit. In fact, many of them have already been extinct. Also spiritually, only humans on earth have Allah Almighty's Spirit in them. No where in the Noble Quran do we see Allah Almighty giving spirits to Animals: "Behold! thy Lord said To the angels: 'I am about To create man, from sounding clay From mud moulded into shape; 'When I have fashioned him (In due proportion) and breathed Into him of My spirit, Fall ye down in obeisance Unto him.' (The Noble Quran, 15:28-29)" Allah created the world and each and every species...full stop..that does it for me! ... for all you guys who support the concept of evolution...question yourself!
Am not lazy. Its about getting others to do it. I just can't be asked working its pointless. You work to earn money, and when your dad has so much money that you can't even count that means you're rich and do not need to work, you can get server/slave to do it for you.
Ok, that is an interesting work ethic. Work is great fun if you don't need the money, you can do anything you want, they can sack you if they want. Go just to make other people feel bad.
Everytime I think I am in danger of developing a sense of empathy for you, you make some brilliant statement that restores my equilibrium. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
no, you don't work to get money. this is the problem with complex societies like ours. work was meant to aid the community. money was created as a referent of trade for services. its not about money, its about advancment. but everyone thinks in terms of money, and needing more, when you should be thinking of how your work is helping other people. seeing as you don't work, you are helping no one and you are actually a burden on society and your father. there is work being done to help you, probably in the hope that it will be investment for work that you might do in return.
When I first started posting here I noticed how rude and intolerant a lot of the other posters were. I thought, how immature, how uneducated, how infantile. The more threads I read I found more sympathy for some of the rudeness, which I now realise is often a product of frustration. I also found more tolerance for the intolerance, which is actually anger at foolish or selfish world views. Your view on work, your attitude to others, makes me very glad that I did not have the 'benefits' of rich parents; that I had to work to get through college; that I discovered the real benefits of work that can go far beyond money. When I read your words at first, I was angry, then I became contemptuous, now I just feel sorry for you.
Then don't. Some comments: Darwin was a Christian until the death of his daughter and the implications of evolution made him question those beliefs. Humans are animals, just more intelligent than most, but only slightly more than the great apes, who are able to learn sign language. Thousands of years is only enough time to observe small evolutionary changes. You do know that evolutionary theory has progressed from Darwin, who didn't even know about genes, although their qualities support evolution? To answer your question, humans developed with their environment. Why is a camel not a bird? Why is up not down? These questions make little sense. Why do we resemble apes? Why do we both have hands, expressive eyes, similar social structure and sexual habits?
Muslim, despite the respect I have for Islam, you should _never_ drag religion into a scientific discussion. It's like Godwins law, or insulting Sidnaceous: You lose every time.
