Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
we dosnt talk about evolution but changes. again; according to evolutionery logic small steps+ time=big steps. so i showed why its a wrong conclusion with the car example.
On the other hand, the same structures, adapted for different things, like a man's arm, a whale's flipper, and a mole's front limb are homologous, even if they do very different things. You're having difficulty distinguishing between analogous and homlogous structures.
again: we are talking about logic. not a biological evolution for now.
So whale-like, that when the skull was first found, it was assumed to be that of a primitive, flippered whale. Turns out, not so. The skull is very whale-like, but the animal had four feet and walked on land.
so how you can distinguish between an anaog trait and homologous one?
in any case we assume evolution is true in both cases.
the echidna is also very hedgeog-like:
echidna - חיפוש ב-Google:
does it mean that he evolved from an hedgeog?
the echidna is also very hedgeog-like:
-_- no, you can't say the same for it; sharks don't even have bones. Homologous structures are distinguished by having the same basic INTERNAL structure, not external similarities.yep. they look similar. but we can say the same for this trait:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/07/29/shark-with-legs/
or this one:
A Shark That Can Walk?!
You ignored the rest of that, about how observing this crap in a human lifetime would disprove evolution, and all about how we have observed the significant transition of a digestive tract from carnivorous to herbivorous. I think you must not understand how different a carnivorous digestive tract is from a herbivorous one. A herbivore will have a digestive tract more than twice the length of a carnivore's, and will have different microflora and enzymes. If an entire organ system can change via evolution, how can you say that anything limits it such that birds cannot have evolved from reptilian ancestors?true. if so its just a belief. its not something that we can prove.
-_- humans can only generate 12 of the 20 amino acids that we need to live. Every plant on this planet generates all 20, as well as all the nucleotides they need and more. By comparison, humans are about as genetically complex as earthworms.yep. but because of alternative splicing we may have more proteins products.
Homologous structures are distinguished by having the same basic INTERNAL structure, not external similarities.
If an entire organ system can change via evolution, how can you say that anything limits it such that birds cannot have evolved from reptilian ancestors?
Homologous traits will originate through the same developmental pathways and have similar shapes.
https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b9.../files/17952/area14mp/jf3ryv2z-1353638860.jpg Yes.so the fifth digit of the koala is homologous to the human fifth digit?:
Your own souce does, didn't you read it? "They evolved an expanded gut to allow them to process these leaves," Irschick said, adding it was something that had not been documented before. "This was a brand-new structure."
Said a person completely unrelated to the study. However, did you forget "All of this might be evolution," Hendry said. "The logical next step would be to confirm the genetic basis for these changes." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2290806/ Were you to try to argue that these changes were adaptive in the same way tanning is in humans, then hatchlings of this lizard would NOT have the same traits in their digestive tract (much like how a woman tanning while pregnant wouldn't make her baby born tan), yet, hatchlings that haven't had a bite to eat have this trait, as put in a quote from my source from an actual scientific paper rather than National Geographic: "Morphological analysis of preserved specimens shows the presence of cecal valves (Fig. 4) in all individuals, including a hatchling (26.4-mm snout-vent length, umbilical scar present) and a very young juvenile (33.11-mm snout-vent length) examined from Pod Mrčaru.""What could be debated, however, is how those changes are interpreted—whether or not they had a genetic basis and not a "plastic response to the environment," said Hendry, who was not associated with the study."
-_- the generations of that lizard are far shorter than our own, so, of course, they evolve faster than we do. This is why we often use bacteria for evolution based experiments: the faster an organism reproduces, the faster it can evolve. Also, a "complex" eye is a trait of multicellular organisms, while a "simple" eye can be a trait of either multicellular organisms or single celled organisms, depending upon how you define it. If you started out with the simplest multicellular eye, could it evolve significantly into a far more complex version in 40 years? Yes, with extreme selective pressures, a small population, and fast reproduction rate, it could.secondly- if an entire organ can evolve in about 40 years. does it prove evolution or falsified it? does its mean that a complex eye can also evolve in about 40 years from a simple one?
Your own souce does, didn't you read it? "They evolved an expanded gut to allow them to process these leaves," Irschick said, adding it was something that had not been documented before. "This was a brand-new structure."
It's genetic.
" If you started out with the simplest multicellular eye, could it evolve significantly into a far more complex version in 40 years? Yes, with extreme selective pressures, a small population, and fast reproduction rate, it could."-
so how you can distinguish between an anaog trait and homologous one?
in any case we assume evolution is true in both cases.
so even if all those traits created by a designer at once, you will still be able to say what is homologous and what is analogous?
Yep. For example, suppose the designer was malicious or just liked practical jokes. He could design some organisms with homologies like bats and whale, and others with analogous organs, like insects and birds.
secondly- if an entire organ can evolve in about 40 years. does it prove evolution or falsified it? does its mean that a complex eye can also evolve in about 40 years from a simple one?
according to this definition homologous traits do need a commondescent(sic) assumption:
Homology (biology) - Wikipedia
"In biology, homology is the existence of shared ancestry between a pair of structures, or genes, in different taxa."
and even berkeley site say that same. so what is your definition?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?