15 Feb 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadI understand enough to know that natural selection of a moth's colour is not sufficient evidence to make the claim in the OP "evolution in action".
You quite clearly neither understand evolution nor basic science. A moth is not a 'species', and 'species' is a man made rather loosely defined classification word.
You are also quite clearly confusing "The Theory of Evolution", evolution theory, and evolution, or at least being rather unclear about which you are referring to.
I would agree that evidenc ...[text shortened]... d it is evidence in support of common ancestry (though clearly not sufficient on its own).
Also your supercilious explanation that a "moth is not a species" is completely irrelevant to my post in which did not make such a claim.
You also completely ignore that fact that it was sonhouse who used a hoax to make the claim that the hoax was evidence of “evolution in action”, so perhaps you should direct your claims of "confused" and "lack of understanding" to him.
15 Feb 12
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadIt was dishonest and even if true does not have anything to do with evolution.
At no point does your link suggest that the example lacks scientific credibility. Would you care to provide any actual references to that effect?
Nothing is reported to have evolved.
P.S. It could also have been used as an example of a possible cause of
natural extinction, which is not evolution. Things do not evolve by
becoming extinct.
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsSince you are an expert in evolution, I would like your advice as to how things evolve.
It was dishonest and even if true does not have anything to do with evolution.
Nothing is reported to have evolved.
P.S. It could also have been used as an example of a possible cause of
natural extinction, which is not evolution. Things do not evolve by
becoming extinct.
16 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsno. you're just ignorant. since you didn't bother to read the linked article before making your asinine comments, allow me to elucidate for you.
You are confusing evolution, which does not occur, with adaptation, which does.
when an completely new function evolves, it is not a simple adaptation. it is exactly the kind of thing predicted by evolution theory. the ability the bacteria evolved was completely new to the e. coli strand. none of the other populations in the experiment evolved this ability.
16 Feb 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritSo what? It is still just adaptation and it is still just bacteria. Zero evolution.
no. you're just ignorant. since you didn't bother to read the linked article before making your asinine comments, allow me to elucidate for you.
when an completely new function evolves, it is not a simple adaptation. it is exactly the kind of thing predicted by evolution theory. the ability the bacteria evolved was completely new to the e. coli strand. none of the other populations in the experiment evolved this ability.
16 Feb 12
Originally posted by divegeesterYou clearly do not understand enough. Natural selection, decidedly is evolution in action.
I understand enough to know that natural selection of a moth's colour is not sufficient evidence to make the claim in the OP "evolution in action".
Also your supercilious explanation that a "moth is not a species" is completely irrelevant to my post in which did not make such a claim.
You implied it. You said "within a species" in one sentence than backed it up by saying "the moths were still moths".
You also completely ignore that fact that it was sonhouse who used a hoax to make the claim that the hoax was evidence of “evolution in action”, so perhaps you should direct your claims of "confused" and "lack of understanding" to him.
Whether sonhouse or his source were wrong or not, you are still clearly quite confused about the very basics of evolution.
16 Feb 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadhttp://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_peppered_moth
You call that a reference? If it was a hoax, why cant you provide a reference to that effect? How do you know it was a hoax? You must have some source for your information.
The name of the article is "Museum of Hoaxes". Isn't that a clue?
16 Feb 12
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadNatural selection is not evolution you idiot. 😏
You clearly do not understand enough. Natural selection, decidedly [b]is evolution in action.
Also your supercilious explanation that a "moth is not a species" is completely irrelevant to my post in which did not make such a claim.
You implied it. You said "within a species" in one sentence than backed it up by saying "the moths were still wrong or not, you are still clearly quite confused about the very basics of evolution.[/b]
P.S. natural selection
noun
the process by which forms of life having traits that better enable them to adapt to specific environmental pressures, as predators, changes in climate, or competition for food or mates, will tend to survive and reproduce in greater numbers than others of their kind, thus ensuring the perpetuation of those favorable traits in succeeding generations.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/natural+selection
Natural selection is adaptation.
16 Feb 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritnatural selection - noun
that's the main mechanism of evolution.
the process by which forms of life having traits that better enable them to adapt to specific environmental pressures, as predators, changes in climate, or competition for food or mates, will tend to survive and reproduce in greater numbers than others of their kind, thus ensuring the perpetuation of those favorable traits in succeeding generations.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/natural+selection
Natural selection is adaptation.
What Does Adaptation Mean?
The special characteristics that enable plants and animals to be successful in a particular environment are called adaptations.
Camouflage, as in a toad's ability to blend in with its surroundings, is a common example of an adaptation. The combination of bright orange and black on a monarch butterfly is an adaptation to warn potential predators that the butterfly is poisonous and prevent it from being eaten. These special features have evolved over long periods of time, through the process of natural selection. Adaptations afford the organism a better chance to survive in its surroundings.
Desert Adaptations
Deserts, where the environment is generally hot and extremely dry, provide many striking examples of how plants and animals are adapted to their surroundings. Plants have many adaptations to cope with the lack of water. Some desert plants, such as the barrel cactus, have expandable stems for storing water. Other plants have adaptations that reduce water loss from their leaves, the part of a plant through which most of the water is lost. Still others have a waxy coating on the leaves, or have small leaves, that reduce the surface area exposed to the drying elements. In many cases, desert plants have no leaves at all. Photosynthesis, which normally occurs in green leaves, is carried out in the stems, which are themselves green with the pigment chlorophyll.
Desert animals also have many adaptations as well to help them survive in the desert climate. Many are nocturnal, meaning active during the cool night rather than the hot daylight hours. The kangaroo rat conserves water by excreting a solid urine rather than liquid.
Tropical Rainforest Adaptations
In sharp contrast, the climate of the tropical rainforest is hot and wet. With over 80 inches of rain per year, as opposed to the desert's 10 inches or less, plants have adaptations that enable them to shed water efficiently. The leaves of many rainforest plants have drip tips for this purpose. Buttress and stilt roots are thought to provide extra support for trees growing in spongy, wet soils.
Tropical rainforest plants also have adaptations to take in what little sunlight is available on the dark forest floor. Large leaves are common; they increase the amount of sunlight a plant can capture. Other plants, like orchids, bromeliads and ferns, grow as epiphytes high up in the canopy where there is more sunlight.
Other Adaptations
The adaptations discussed above are all adaptations to specific climatic conditions, but organisms have also developed adaptations to other aspects of their environment. Some animals have adapted to eat a certain type of food; others have adapted to avoid being eaten themselves. Most animals have behavioral adaptations which help them attract a mate. In the plant world, many flowers have evolved specific structures that help ensure pollination by the insects they attract.
http://www.mbgnet.net/sets/rforest/adapt.htm
Darwin thought that adaptation by natural selection could result in evolution.
However, this theory has never been proved.