Darwinism does not explain where new species come from…how do you like that
My friend, Darwin did not live long enough to explain alot of things. You can use Darwin’s theories to help find the explanations. I am not near being a scientist but, I can grasp how new species evolve from having a grasp of Darwinism.
turtle: Darwinism does not explain where new species come from…how do you like that"
K: actually it does. You just have to pay attention. You have one species, say for example, wolves.
You have a pack of wolves who live near the Grand Canyon. One fine day, the wolves separate into
two groups. One group goes on the west side where it is warm and the other group goes to the east side
where it is cold. Now on the warm side, the wolves don’t need long fur and it is an impediment to
surviving the warmth. Recall, that the key is traits that allow species to survive the environment the
species finds itself in. One wolf because it has shorter fur than others wolfs, has a better chance, note
the probability aspect of evolution, that wolf breeds with another wolf creating wolfs with shorter fur,
because shorter fur allows a better chance of survival in that environment. over time and this is important
time, over time the whole pack of wolves living on the west side have shorter fur than the wolves living
on the east side. Once the two packs are unable to breed together, that is the creation of new species.
Traits that are beneficial to the species to survive the environment and then passing those traits on
to the next generation. For example, Darwin himself commented on finches living on the galpagoes? island
that have become two different species because they lived on two islands whereas it was clear at one time
they lived together on one island, being one species. So yes, Darwinism does explain in great detail how
new species are created.
Kropotkin
how does Darwin explain going from prokaryotes to eukaryotes…
I’m not sure if what you need is a discussion board, or a classroom. You should learn the basics of a subject before trying to discuss it.
Try google.
Anytime a birth occurs, that is Darwinism. You are different in some aspect than your parents,
that is Darwinism. Your birth did not violate any aspect of the second law of thermodynamics or
any other stupid other claim by creationist types.
Kropotkin
I don’t think your were very polite phon…also Darwin didn’t explain endosymbiosis…isn’t that correct
and phon you are overreacting…I am not a creationist
surprise… all you not-it alls…Darwin only talked about “descent with modification”…you all are talking about neodarwinism…
Darwin was talking only about natural selection…
He talked about a lot more besides.
As you might know, Darwin lived before the discovery of DNA, and clearly what is “Darwinism” has grown since then. So I’m puzzled to understand why you are asking the question in post 1.
Darwin observed several examples of speciation (finches and tortoises for example) in the islands of the Galapagos, and it is from them that NS was developed. Additionally Wallace whose ideas were brought together with Darwin’s helped form the theory.Wallace added many reflections of species differences due to geographic isolation. NS is partly the result of the evident speciation that was part of the empirical picture that led to an understanding of NS.
NS explains speciation, as speciation gives us NS.
So.I’ll ask again what don’t you understand?
I understand more than you are thinking about…Darwin was correct with natural selection…neodarwinism is probably wrong…don’t mix them in the same pot
You’ve yet to demonstrate any knowledge at all. “Darwinism” and “Neo-darwinism” are what is known as dustbin categories, and really of no use to this discussion at all.
You can mix them up in the same post as they are not distinct and can all be dumped in the same dustbin as “evolutionary theory”.
You really need to get down to specifics. Because so far you have said nothing.
Both categories “neo” or not have different levels of explication that deal with speciation.
lev how did Darwin explain going from prokaryotes to eukaryotes …
also you need to differentiate between Darwin and neodarwin…Darwin was right but neodarwin random mutation theory may not explain what goes on now…
Why don’t the wolves with long fur go back and live in the colder climate?
The fact that they left in the first place seems to contradict your position.
If an animal walks into a freezer will it just stay in there until it dies, or walk out again?
Also: surely your explanation holds for humans as well?
An interesting story, but no explanation of why the arrangement was beneficial.
We could imagine countless situations in which it wasn’t.
Hint: whatever story you choose to give I’m sure it will fit nicely all the available evidence.
I hope you realize that a very simplified “in a nutshell” diagram isn’t going to have the answers to all of your questions, and open up the encyclopedia.
There were and continue to be countless situations in which the arrangement isn’t beneficial. In these cases, endosymbiosis does not occur.
As to your hint, duh. That is what theories do.
“Darwinism” (aka evolution) is the work of hundreds of thousands of people, built on the original theory proposed by Darwin.
What is your point?
Duh!
None of that contradicts what I said.
It’s as though you’ve never heard of animal migration.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_migration