Do you agree with these statements?

[Gregory Thompson]

It kinda is though. For example: Living, breathing, glowing rabbits successfully born

In a collaborative effort between the University of Hawaii at Manoa and two universities in Turkey, scientists created two transgenic (genetically modified) bunnies by inserting a gene from jellyfish DNA into a rabbit embryo.​

That's pretty cool, so will we have glowing eggs for easter?

 

[Speedwell]

That's pretty cool, so will we have glowing eggs for easter?

Quite possibly--there are already glow-in-the-dark chickens.

Glowing in the dark, GMO chickens shed light on bird flu fight

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Quite possibly--there are already glow-in-the-dark chickens.

Glowing in the dark, GMO chickens shed light on bird flu fight

That's pretty awesome, so long as it's not radioactive, that would be mean to the bird.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

That's pretty awesome, so long as it's not radioactive, that would be mean to the bird.

A self-cooking chicken sounds pretty cool!

 

[Shemjaza]

You should caveat your posts to say that you do not hold to the Darwinian view of evolution as adaptation is not evolutionary within the context of his definition. Nice try but no.

Can you support that claim?

Because it sounds like a mistake.


Adaptation had always been a part of evolutionarily theory.

 

[Kylie]

The shorter legs stop the Zebra escaping quickly from a predator. So how do you explain these shortening legs, and how that could gift some advantage to the Zebra.

Short legs are less prone to breaking; imagine if Zebras had long spindly legs like racehorses do. Have you seen how many leg injuries racehorses get? When you consider that zebras often use quick changes of direction to evade predators, shorter and stockier legs would produce a benefit by making it more like that an individual could quickly change direction without sustaining injury.

 

[inquiring mind]

Some questions...

1. Do you agree that if you have a group of animals - say a herd of zebra - then each individual will be slightly different to the others?
2. Do you agree that some of those differences can make it easier for that individual to survive - say, better eyesight so it has a better chance of spotting an approaching predator?
3. Do you agree that these differences are due to the genes that the animals have?
   
4. Do you agree that the genes that are responsible for these differences can be passed on to the offspring when that animal reproduces?
5. Do you agree that if an animal has some genes that mean it has a difference that helps it survive, this animal is more likely to have more offspring precisely because these differences help it live longer (living longer means more chances to reproduce)?
6. Do you agree that if animals with these helpful differences produce more offspring, then the number of animals in the herd that have this helpful difference will tend to increase over the generations?
7. Do you agree that if we wait for enough generations to pass, most if not all animals in the herd will have this difference, and what was once different is now normal?

If you think it's wrong, can you tell me which one exactly do you think is incorrect?

Some questions...

1. Do you agree that if you have a group of animals - say a herd of zebra - then each individual will be slightly different to the others? Yes
2. Do you agree that some of those differences can make it easier for that individual to survive - say, better eyesight so it has a better chance of spotting an approaching predator? Yes
3. Do you agree that these differences are due to the genes that the animals have? In many cases, but there are too many other variables at play for such a broad statement.
4. Do you agree that the genes that are responsible for these differences can be passed on to the offspring when that animal reproduces? Yes
5. Do you agree that if an animal has some genes that mean it has a difference that helps it survive, this animal is more likely to have more offspring precisely because these differences help it live longer (living longer means more chances to reproduce)? Possibly, but another broad statement that doesn’t consider other variables at play.
6. Do you agree that if animals with these helpful differences produce more offspring, then the number of animals in the herd that have this helpful difference will tend to increase over the generations? It’s a theory anyway.
7. Do you agree that if we wait for enough generations to pass, most if not all animals in the herd will have this difference, and what was once different is now normal? No, it’s just a theory… too many other variables to ever achieve near perfect vision for all specifically, or project zebras or anything else changing into something beyond its Kind generally.

 

[Shemjaza]

What have wolves and dogs got to do with anything? Why insert that trivia into the conversation. They are not separate species, wolves and dogs.

It isn't trivia to bring up wolves and dogs.

While they are currently most commonly classified as sub species of Canis lupus, they work to demonstrate how speciation works.

If the only varieties of species that existed were Great Danes and Jack Russel Terriers then despite their very similar genetics they would not be able to naturally breed and the two populations would diverge.

The branching tree of creatures that make up the hominid family works the same way.

Neanderthals and Homo sapiens are very similar and could interbreed... but had clear differences.

Homo erectus was even more different to a Homo sapiens... but it's possible it was still able to breed with our species.

 

[klutedavid]

Short legs are less prone to breaking; imagine if Zebras had long spindly legs like racehorses do. Have you seen how many leg injuries racehorses get? When you consider that zebras often use quick changes of direction to evade predators, shorter and stockier legs would produce a benefit by making it more like that an individual could quickly change direction without sustaining injury.

Shorter legs makes them slower.

 

[klutedavid]

If you are aware that species (or individual organisms, for that matter) don't "decide" to evolve, why did you chose these words then, other than to erect a strawman?

A quick post obviously. Some of us have not got everyday free.

 

[klutedavid]

You read the whole thing and checked the references in only 20 minutes? You must read quickly.



Not familiar with these guys, eh?

Or these?

The hippopotamus is the second largest terrestrial animal behind elephants. They are heavy, strong, and ferocious. They are in the water to cool off because they cannot regulate their body heat. They graze through the night on grass.

The hippopotamus is a very special herbivore and a rare exception to the general rule. Do not go near the water unless you have no choice. I am rather surprised at your desperation, to illustrate an example of a tetrapod, living in or near the water.

Pakicetus is small and prey for marine predators. Clutching at straws.

 

[Shemjaza]

The hippopotamus is the second largest terrestrial animal behind elephants. They are heavy, strong, and ferocious. They are in the water to cool off because they cannot regulate their body heat. They graze through the night on grass.

The hippopotamus is a very special herbivore and a rare exception to the general rule. Do not go near the water unless you have no choice. I am rather surprised at your desperation, to illustrate an example of a tetrapod, living in or near the water.

Pakicetus is small and prey for marine predators. Clutching at straws.

So you made up a rule about hoofed mammals... it was false.

Now have a new rule "it was small"... and about tetrapods now...

Are you aware of snakes, seals, crocodiles, water dragons, ducks, otters, capybaras, water rats, tapirs, turtles, bats and whales?

 

[Qwertyui0p]

Just to check:
If they can reproduce fertile offspring then they are the same kind.
If they cannot produce fertile offspring then they might be the same kind.

Is that correct?

Yes.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I was kind of joking, chimera type genetic engineering isn't really a thing so ..

Ah, OK. It sounded similar enough to some of the most absurd creationist ideas we see on these forums that I did a double-take.

 

[Shemjaza]

Yes.

The problem with that definition is that it is impossible to detect if two species are not the same kind.

This makes the whole concept useless as a way to study and understand the world.

 

[klutedavid]

So you made up a rule about hoofed mammals... it was false.

Now have a new rule "it was small"... and about tetrapods now...

Are you aware of snakes, seals, crocodiles, water dragons, ducks, otters, capybaras, water rats, tapirs, turtles, bats and whales?

Ducks, snakes, bats, ducks, water dragons, e.t.c. Are not tetrapods!

 

[klutedavid]

It isn't trivia to bring up wolves and dogs.

While they are currently most commonly classified as sub species of Canis lupus, they work to demonstrate how speciation works.

If the only varieties of species that existed were Great Danes and Jack Russel Terriers then despite their very similar genetics they would not be able to naturally breed and the two populations would diverge.

They can still breed and I have seen a picture of a very large dog mating, with a small dog breed.

Dogs are separated all over the world and so are wolves. I have yet to see a new canine species develop.

 

[Speedwell]

Ducks, snakes, bats, ducks, water dragons, e.t.c. Are not tetrapods!

Yes, they are.

Tetrapod | animal

 

[klutedavid]

Some questions...

1. Do you agree that if you have a group of animals - say a herd of zebra - then each individual will be slightly different to the others? Yes
2. Do you agree that some of those differences can make it easier for that individual to survive - say, better eyesight so it has a better chance of spotting an approaching predator? Yes
3. Do you agree that these differences are due to the genes that the animals have? In many cases, but there are too many other variables at play for such a broad statement.
4. Do you agree that the genes that are responsible for these differences can be passed on to the offspring when that animal reproduces? Yes
5. Do you agree that if an animal has some genes that mean it has a difference that helps it survive, this animal is more likely to have more offspring precisely because these differences help it live longer (living longer means more chances to reproduce)? Possibly, but another broad statement that doesn’t consider other variables at play.
6. Do you agree that if animals with these helpful differences produce more offspring, then the number of animals in the herd that have this helpful difference will tend to increase over the generations? It’s a theory anyway.
7. Do you agree that if we wait for enough generations to pass, most if not all animals in the herd will have this difference, and what was once different is now normal? No, it’s just a theory… too many other variables to ever achieve near perfect vision for all specifically, or project zebras or anything else changing into something beyond its Kind generally.

But that is not an example of speciation. We need a different species to be generated. Separate two groups of Zebras and see if you can generate an entirely different species. I strongly doubt it.

 

[klutedavid]

Yes, they are.

Tetrapod | animal

Someone's wrong here.

The prefix, 'tetra', is Greek for four.