kazadoom said:
GotchayeA said:
But what would distinguish these intermediary species? They'd simply appear to be yet another subspecies. And, in fact, it's my understanding that we have found groups of animals that could breed with another group, which could breed with another group, which could not breed with the first group.
If your question is why we don't see a clear continuum of living species, then the answer is, again, natural selection. There isn't a continuum of environments, and the specialized species on either end are going to be more suitable for one sort of environment or another than the species in the middle. Evolution is supposed to be a very slow process - there's plenty of time for intermediary species to be reabsorbed. |
If this is true, then what happened from water to land, they just developed lungs over time, then flopped around on the ground until legs appeared over time? What did birds do when only one wing developed, wait around on the other one flopping around until they got what they needed? This is utter stupidity. If it is a slow process then show me something now that is changing from one species to another. There ought to be some proof of something out there. Where are all these mysterious transitional forms? |
Take a look at domestic wolves, yes I mean dogs. They haven't yet speciated from their anscestors and yet look at the genetic differences common in all dogs. That's like something in the range of 400,000 years of evolution right there and still no new species. It takes time. And no, fish did not flop on land until they evovled lung, that would have been a good way to go completely extinct. Nope they more than likely evovled lungs first and became obligate are breathers later and still later developed ample appendages to walk with, until finnally developing crude legs. Sort of like this maybe, as oversimplified as it is. Anscetral Fish-->Goldfish-->Lungfish-->Salamander-->Primitive reptile-->Mammal
