Here, Tackleberry, I will repost a post I made on the last page, one you did not respond to, please read it.
Tacklebery, I am glad you have showed a vested interest in learning; if you are willing to learn has yet to be shown. But please read what we have to say, and do not dismiss things offhand. You need to look at the facts and look at them carefully. I will now address this set of questions, please
read these answers I'm giving you.
Another thing...
Why do things evolve? To get better, stronger, more resistant to predators, etc.
A common misunderstanding, I won't harp on you for it. Ok, first things first:
There is no 'why' in evolution. Why do things evolve? They simply do. It is not a why question. This is really important, remember this.
Right now we are trying to help you better understand was evolution actually is.
Theology has the final say on the 'why' question. Science says 'how'.
So it's based on survival of the fittest.
Sort of. But you mustn't misunderstand what the word 'fittest' means. 'Fittest' is used in context to a specific creatures' environment.
Can you tell me which animal is more fit, a tortoise, or a hare?
Well, say these two animals lived in a desert environment. Now, introduce birds of prey into this desert environment.
The hare is now hunted by these birds. The hare is now less fit for its environment, that is, it is less likely to reproduce than the tortoise, because the tortoise will not be hunted by these birds. They cannot take down a tortoise. But, they can attack and kill the hares.
The hare is now less fit than the tortoise, and the tortoise is now more fit for the environment then the hare is.
Do you now understand what 'survival of the fittest' means?
If one species developed into a better species, why are all these old species still around? If fish developed into birds, and birds into dinosaurs, and ultimately into primates and then humans, why are there still fish? Why are there still single celled organisms? That just does not make sense.
You're question is a common one, and I'm not surprised, it seems an obvious problem for evolution if you do not fully understand the implications of the question you are asking.
Ok, think about this:
The U.S. is here. The U.S. exists. It is a country across the sea from Britain.
Now...Was not the U.S. started by British people?
Why are British people still in existance if they became American people?
The simple answer to this question and yours is,
not every British person became an American. The majority stayed back in Britain.
In the same way, not every member of a species undergoes the same evolutionary stages.
To give an example, if a group of black insects lived in the forest, and one of them, when born, was green, would not this green insect have a higher chance of reproduction than its brothers? After all, it can hide amongst the green leaves of the forest. Its brothers cannot. It would be less vulnerable to predators.
Now, this one insect is still green. But, it and its offspring and its offspring's offspring are the only green ones; the black insects still exist. They may or may not die off, but if they live on, there are now two colours of insects.
And you would be asking, if the green insects evolved from the black insects, why are black insects still around?
Many of the questions you are asking show a basic misunderstanding of what evolution actually is and what it entails. But its not a problem; we're always learning. Hopefully you learned something today as well.
Please read everything abovea few times over to really try and understand it. It is actually quite simple.
Again, this gddmnd word "theory".
