Evolution - Fact Or Fiction?

[Lee]

Re: Evolution - fact or fiction

Born without tusks? is that even possible? How? by hunting has this caused the DNA coding of an elephant to change?

i think you don't have knowledge about elepohants.in asian elephants
only male have tusks.and even not all males have tusks.male elephant without tusks are called makhna.with the hunting of male elephants
with tusks large number of makhna have the chance to mate with the females.so many male calves are born without tusks.if this will continue
the future generation of asian elephants will no have tusks.there gene pool is changing

This is indeed evolution in action.

Evolution is simply that thoese triats more conducive to survival get passed onto offspring whilst those not do not. The reason, well that too is very simple.

If I am a mouse with shorter back legs than my brother mice, then chances are I will be caught by the cat and killed. So no chance to mate and pass my short legs along to my children. My brothers with the long legs survice to mate, and so long legged mice prosper whislt short legged mice eventualy die out.

As with the elephants, to hunt those with tusks means that those without tusks get a better chance to mate, thus tuskless elephants. It really is that easy.

Another example, the flu virus. The present swine flu is nothing more than the old bird flu mutated and crossing speices.

There is a very good book that details all about evolution, Charles Darwins 'The theorory of evoltion by means of natural selection'. Really before you can speak out about evolution you should go and read it. You can still purchaes it in any bookshop, go, go out and buy it now.

 

[spnadmin]

Re: Evolution - fact or fiction

Lee ji

Thank you for an excellent illustration of how natural selection works as per Charles Darwin. It still holds true, simple -- but continually confused with ideas like survival of the fittest and inheritance of acquired characteristics. Do you have any idea why?

 

[Lee]

Narayanjot ji,

The term survivial of the fittest as has already been pointed out was not one that Darwin coined, it was in fact a contempory of his that first used it (not though for racist reasons as has mistakenly been said), and in fact Darwin did agree that it was a fitting phrase and in later editions of his book did use it himself.

The misunderstandings come with the word 'fittest', it is meant, in this context, the 'best suited' rather then the strongest. So those creatures with atributes 'best suited' to survival (the long legs of the mice for example) would survive whilst those who's atributes did not 'fit' the bill were rather less fortunate. As with many words, context is king in understanding.

 

[spnadmin]

Lee ji

Thank you for adding that extra layer of understanding about "survival of the fittest" which is misused as a rule, in the 18th Century and also today, to justify the political and economic right of the powerful to overwhelm those less powerful and less affluent.

Originally the term "survival of the fittest" was used to justify a pure form of capitalism which tore societies apart in the early years of the Industrial Revolution. It was "coined" by the economist Malthus. Darwin's own adaption is interesting and I was not aware of that.