₦airaland Forum

davidylan:
As is usual... you are confusing strains with species... a strain is simply a subtype of a particular organism all within the same specie (higher taxonomic classification).

As i said earlier, the agouti mouse has a genetic variation that gives it a unique brown coat color, Balb/C mice are typically white, while C57BL/6 mice are black. In addition, there are numerous variants of genetically modified mice... they are all mice, unless you claim that scientists have been creating new species for the last 30 years.

Yes there are variants of plasmodium... but they are all still PLASMODIUM. None of them has evolved into completely different species with clear differences in phenotype.

I have found that you have problems with the definition of "species ".

There are about 11 different definitions, all not generally accepted definition of the term "species ", but each has its own strong point.

Next time you debate about what a species is, maybe you should first define how you understand the term.

check the definitions here

science.kennesaw.edu/~rmatson/Biol%203380/3380species.html

#No hard feelings. If you feel insulted, dont reply.

labimide:
Actually, you keep proving that you don't know enough to distinguish between bogus and genuine, if you are confronted with either.

Logic and eloquence are not enough, splice them with adequate knowledge.

You do leave a lot to admire, anyway. The reason I look forward to you posts. Quite some analytical mind!

Not able to decide between bogus and genuine yet having an analytical mind. Just one more example of your confusion.

labimide:
Selection (both natural and artificial), genetic drift, migration, mutation, isolation and gene flow all drive evolution.

Of relatively small changes in species such as in dogs yes. Of large changes such as ape-to-man evolution thy are woefully inadequate. My focus is on the primary mechanisms random mutations and NS. I have stated their weaknesses. Random mutations only degrade or destroys things while NS at best conserves specific traits vital to survival, its importance is overhyped. Nature at heart is blind to any trait.

UyiIredia:
Not able to decide between bogus and genuine yet having an analytical mind. Just one more example of your confusion.

Not everyone is out to pull another down. Even in mental fencing. No disrespect was intended by my intial post, my apology if any was conceived.

You might want to go over it again, when your temper is down. Enjoy.

ooman:
I have found that you have problems with the definition of "species ".

There are about 11 different definitions, all not generally accepted definition of the term "species ", but each has its own strong point.

Next time you debate about what a species is, maybe you should first define how you understand the term.

check the definitions here

science.kennesaw.edu/~rmatson/Biol%203380/3380species.html

#No hard feelings. If you feel insulted, dont reply.

Why write it if you feel it can insult in anyway. I believe no one wins an argument. And it is sometimes wise to quit before it deteriorates. I have learnt somethings in this argument and I have acknowledged them where I deemed fit. Enjoy.

labimide:
Not everyone is out to pull another down. Even in mental fencing. No disrespect was intended by my intial post, my apology if any was conceived.

You might want to go over it again, when your temper is down. Enjoy.

Funny enough I'm not angry. I simply stated what I thought. To say to contradictory things in the same lost is a sign of confusion.

sinequanon:
When it rains, earthworms tend to surface from underground.

Creatures, like seagulls take advantage of this by "running on the spot", their feet mimicking the pitter-patter of rain. This encourages earthworms to the surface, on which they feed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OcJstUfD88

The question is, using The Theory of Evolution, explain how the seagulls developed this ability.

More info about "worm charming"...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worm_charming

Seagulls wait for the right conditions to do their dance.

These are the kind of observations that happen around you regularly that can help you assess the Theory of Evolution more critically.

(Wait for some illogical so-and-so to read a conclusion into the OP.)

There is such a thing as cultural transmission, recently termed meme by Dawkins in his book, the selfish gene.

Animals do copy behavior from each other and they do secret chemical signals like pheromones that help them communicate "safe", "unsafe", and "s.ex" to others. Such communications also spread a behavior accross a group.

EvilBrain1:
What the hell is wrong with you people? How many times does someone have to explain natural selection to you before you get it? Why can't you read a book or watch a YouTube video and comprehend like a normal person? I'm tired of repeating this stuff! What the hell!

Look, all living things reproduce. All living things have offspring that are similar to their parents but different in tiny ways that makes each individual unique. Some of those differences favour survival, some make no difference, and some are disadvantages. All living things have more offspring than the environment can support meaning that many or most will die off before adulthood and they all have to compete to survive. Nature selects those who have traits that favour survival and kills off those who don't. Therefore any population of living things will gradually slowly change in appearance, physiology and behaviour as nature and death molds them to fit their environment.

Once upon a time a seagull was born with a type of brain touch that made it behave wierdly and keep running along the ground for no good reason. Somehow, food inexplicably kept coming out of the earth and the seagull ate very well. Because of its constant good diet the seagull grew big and strong and had plenty of seagull babies many of whom also inherited the brain touch. The seagull's babies survived more than those of his mates because of the highly proteinaceous food he kept bringing home. Soon there were plenty of young brain touched seagulls running along the ground and eating the food that strangely kept coming out. The next time there was a drought, many seagulls starved and died but the brain touched seagull's offspring flourished, outcompeted the others and became dominant. Meanwhile even among the brain touched seagulls, some ran in subtly different ways that brought out more or less food. Those whose running style brought out more food out competed those whose brought out less and became dominant. And so, over a long period of time, nature and death continued to shape the seagull population until we ended up with a bunch of birds all of whom can tapdance expertly to attract worms. And that's when some stupìd Christians showed up and claimed it was because of Jesus. It wasn't because of Jesus.

Please note that there is no intelligence or planning involved here. The seagulls have no clue what they are doing, they're just following instincts they were born with. The fact that they exist is solely due to their ancestors having survived and passed on those traits. Also nature doesn't know or care what is happening because it is not intelligent or conscious. Nature is not trying to evolve better seagulls. Its just that the nature of living things and the laws of the universe mean that evolution and increasing complexity are inevitable.

Understand?

I am impressed with this your explanation. It should be labels "Evolution for dummies ", anyone who does not understand evolution after this your brilliant explanation does not deserve a brain.

wirinet:
I am impressed with this your explanation. It should be labels "Evolution for dummies ", anyone who does not understand evolution after this your brilliant explanation does not deserve a brain.

Yeah.
I wish the mods cam make it a Sticky labelled " Evolution for Dummies ". That way , all these dumb people can read it first before posting their ignorant questions about the theory of evolution.

wirinet:
I am impressed with this your explanation. It should be labels "Evolution for dummies ", anyone who does not understand evolution after this your brilliant explanation does not deserve a brain.

Thanks.

Natural selection is by far the easiest scientific concept to explain because it's so simple. You almost wonder how it took so long for someone to see it. Its like Thomas Huxley said, "How stupíd of me not to have thought of that."

It's sad to see how people deliberately refuse to get it just to protect their religious beliefs.

davidylan:
considering he propounded the theory in the first place, one would expect such an appellation would be appropriate. On the other hand, Darwin is more famous for his laws of genetics which are the basic foundation of any genetics class the world over. ToE? Not so much... nice theory which is however not universally accepted.

David, especially the bolded, have you no shame?

ooman:
I have found that you have problems with the definition of "species ".

There are about 11 different definitions, all not generally accepted definition of the term "species ", but each has its own strong point.

Next time you debate about what a species is, maybe you should first define how you understand the term.

check the definitions here

science.kennesaw.edu/~rmatson/Biol%203380/3380species.html

#No hard feelings. If you feel insulted, dont reply.

here is another copy/paster pretending to have an idea what he is talking about. I think you should pick up a biology textbook and read the definition of species there. Many of you are super confused, largely because your entire "science" knowledge is based on what scraps you glean on google.

DeepSight:
^^^ O you will... hopefully today... been busy, my apologies. I hope you are well.

I have sent all you requested. still waiting to read from you. please respond