connorlindeman
Plantman
Fish of the Month 🌟
5x Tank of the Month 🏆
Supporting Member ⭐
📋 Contest Moderator
I do not believe that H. neanderthalensis existed so I can not speak to that.
Oblio
Fish Herder
Fair enough.
What about the first question?:
So what scientific proof do you have that microevolution (which we have agreed exists) cannot lead to individuals that cannot interbreed?
jesusjones
Fish Fanatic
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2009
- Messages
- 63
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 18
Mule - Wikipedia
That’s like saying you don’t believe dinosaurs existed , there tones of evidence that Neanderthal co lived with modern human same as the denisovans , and your dna will back up all the evidence by having 1-2% Neanderthal dna , meaning interbreeding did happen
Mules are born sterile to my knowledge so incapable of being its own species a mule is just a donkey horse hybridThe Mule is what I use to rationalize this question. Hypothetically, if the Mule was able to reproduce and it out competed (to extinction) its parent species would we say the parent species somehow "evolved" into the mule. Especially, if we had only broken and partial fossil records to go by....?Mule - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I believe it is more along the line of selective breeding as the gene variation and pool has been vastly affected by poachers killing large male tuskers and tusked females. Leaving behind tuskless animals or ones with smaller, less desirable tusks to mate and procreate. If all you have left to breed are tusk deficient animals, I do not believe these genes being expressed to be a natural evolutionary path. If elephants were left on their own, were not selectively shot for their tusks, and developed this unique change to their tusks then I would be all for an evolutionary change being the reason. A genetic mutation that kills offspring of any gender is not an evolutionary advantage.
Perfectly said. Precisely my thoughts also, but expressed better than I could manage!The key word is "mutation", the tusk less elephant is a MUTANT!and its taking over the world!
There is no attempt at evolution by an organism, mutants are born and if that mutation is favorable for the current environment it stands a higher chance of continuing to exist. Enough mutations over generations and you just might go from slime to typing on some forum. Micro, macro, it is all evolution, it is just how far back you stand when you look at it.
Humans have a pretty big impact on the environment.
glyn
New Member
What? As I said in another thread here ... tot me and luv a duck!
Oblio
Fish Herder
We have a fossil record and DNA evidence... are you suggesting that all these scientists are involved in a giant conspiracy?
Who were the Neanderthals? | Natural History Museum
What is a Neanderthal? Are Neanderthals human? Find out facts about the species Homo neanderthalensis, including when these ancient people lived and what they looked like.
jesusjones
Fish Fanatic
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2009
- Messages
- 63
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 18
Imagine, if it could reproduce. Now imagine it happened thousands of years ago and its parent species are gone. We only look at mules and wonder where they came from. And we are able to trace it back by fossils to the time of horses and donkeys but we never find that mule in a horse womb fossil to connect the dots. The fact the mule exists, is proof enough for me to guess how jumps in "evolution" could of occurred.
Last edited:
The big question here is elephants, and it's relevant to fish breeding because natural selection and linebreeding selection work the same way, except that humans are trying to create forms and nature just happens. If the genes for ivory are getting weeded out, then there will be less ivory.
Maybe our Homo neanderthalensis ancestors didn't believe in themselves any more than some fundamentalists do, and that contributed to their demise! You know, the ads on the cave walls all showed people with different cranial structure and body shape, leading to self esteem issues, dating Homo sapiens, extinction...
You can't debate with blind faith.
Maybe our Homo neanderthalensis ancestors didn't believe in themselves any more than some fundamentalists do, and that contributed to their demise! You know, the ads on the cave walls all showed people with different cranial structure and body shape, leading to self esteem issues, dating Homo sapiens, extinction...
You can't debate with blind faith.
Oblio
Fish Herder
connorlindeman
Plantman
Fish of the Month 🌟
5x Tank of the Month 🏆
Supporting Member ⭐
📋 Contest Moderator
Perhaps I could have worded better what I said.
I do not believe that the common interpretation of what H. neanderthalensis was is correct
What they call Neanderthals were simply ancient humans who were VERY human. Not the missing link between man and beast.
I do not believe that the common interpretation of what H. neanderthalensis was is correct
What they call Neanderthals were simply ancient humans who were VERY human. Not the missing link between man and beast.
This is sliding dangerously close into a religious debate. Micro/macro evolution is not scientific, it's a bridging idea by religions to explain some parts of evolution, while denying others. Can see this thread getting into murky waters where we're debating religious ideology, not scientific fact. What do you think, @Wills ?
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
717 -
336 -
334 -
197 -
196 -
172 -
169 -
168 -
167 -
156 -
145 -
141 -
92 -
86 -
82