Evolution Question???

[fishnthings]

probably salt first, i mean look at the ocean

how do you know the ocean was always salt? could of just evolved or something..idk

 

[Euge]

you are kinda contradictiong yourself...

Evolution Theory:
Fish A...sprouts legs therefore able to walk

Fish B...sprouts wings therefore able to fly

It would be like you just growing gills right now.

Adaptation/Mutation Theory:
Moth A: Brown with dark spots....doesnt get eaten by owls because it is camoflauged against a birch tree.
Moth B: Dark Brown almost Black....gets eaten by the owl because it doesnt blend in.
(both moths are same species....black one is a mutation)

During Industrial Revolution the Birch trees get covered in Soot.

Moth A: gets eaten by owls because it can be seen on the dark background

Moth B: doesnt get eaten because owl cant see it.

Therefore Moth A type population is very much less and the Moth B thrives in the Industrial area. Moth A thrives in the other areas...leaving both colored moths.

Adaptation/Mutation is not seen in human because we have no natural predators. if we did those of us that could run faster (just an example) would thrive because we would escape, leaving the slow ones behind. over time the human race would be made up of very fast people.

Evolution is a process that takes very little time...just one day a fish next day a walking/flying animal.

Adaptation/Mutation takes many years...therefore we dont see it just happening.

make your own decision...but remember Darwin the Godfather of Evolution denied his theory of evolution. He took the side of Adaptation/Mutation which is also know as "Surival of the Fittest" or "Natural Selection". He understood that a Finch would not just change its beak to better eat a nut or better eat a berry. but a mutation would allow one or the other to thrive depending on the food source in the area. that is why there are very similiar animals in different regions. years ago they may have been the same animal but a mutation allowed one to thrive in one region and the other in another.


But hey just my .02

I've always thought and head, and please correct me if i'm wrong, that evolution doesn't happen in a day. I've heard it takes millions of years, thats why we have fossil records of animals evolving. I've never ever ever heard of a fish being a fish one day. Then wakes up the next day to be a walking/flying creature?

To me an animal evolving over night sounds too much like x men to me. In which they explained is due to a fast acting ressesive gene.

 

[Euge]

I also think that natural selection and evolution are so tightly linked that they need each other. In my first post i gave an example of a fish evolving to be able to change its appearance. That is the evolution part. The natural selection part is all his bro's and sis's not being able to do that so because of this defect he's survived and he's the fittest thats why his gene will be passd on. Sometimes it isn't as obvious tho like the example you gave of people running faster.

 

[Jesse]

you are kinda contradictiong yourself...

Evolution Theory:
Fish A...sprouts legs therefore able to walk

Fish B...sprouts wings therefore able to fly

It would be like you just growing gills right now.

Adaptation/Mutation Theory:
Moth A: Brown with dark spots....doesnt get eaten by owls because it is camoflauged against a birch tree.
Moth B: Dark Brown almost Black....gets eaten by the owl because it doesnt blend in.
(both moths are same species....black one is a mutation)

During Industrial Revolution the Birch trees get covered in Soot.

Moth A: gets eaten by owls because it can be seen on the dark background

Moth B: doesnt get eaten because owl cant see it.

Therefore Moth A type population is very much less and the Moth B thrives in the Industrial area. Moth A thrives in the other areas...leaving both colored moths.

Adaptation/Mutation is not seen in human because we have no natural predators. if we did those of us that could run faster (just an example) would thrive because we would escape, leaving the slow ones behind. over time the human race would be made up of very fast people.

Evolution is a process that takes very little time...just one day a fish next day a walking/flying animal.

Adaptation/Mutation takes many years...therefore we dont see it just happening.

make your own decision...but remember Darwin the Godfather of Evolution denied his theory of evolution. He took the side of Adaptation/Mutation which is also know as "Surival of the Fittest" or "Natural Selection". He understood that a Finch would not just change its beak to better eat a nut or better eat a berry. but a mutation would allow one or the other to thrive depending on the food source in the area. that is why there are very similiar animals in different regions. years ago they may have been the same animal but a mutation allowed one to thrive in one region and the other in another.


But hey just my .02

You're mistaken. What you're labeling "Evolution Theory" is actually the long disproved Lamarckian evolution theory:

Larmarckian evolution

Natural selection and mutation are all parts of the accepted theory of evolution.

 

[Jeox]

Id say salt to fresh

 

[DeLgAdO]

Sorry to burst ur bubble, sudz, lol, but there are plenty of examples, including the diversification of species, vast presence of very similar yet different characteristics in living animals, aswell as the fossil record.. for example.. I know this is a very used one, but Darwin's study of the Golapagos finches.. I think thats some pretty solid evidence.. as well as the terrestrial and aquatic species of iguanas on the islands, differing slightly by island. It could be just me, but there seems to be evidence all over the place...

look at the arowana family

they all had to have come from single species and evolved into there own species when the continents split apart.

 

[Fry]

how do you know the ocean was always salt? could of just evolved or something..idk

i don't, it's a good guess though, looking at the salt concentration in the ocean now, can you imagine all that salt not being in all that water? if not, the salt had to be piled up when all land was stuck together (pangea?) or hidden deep if not in the water, so i think it is very likely that the ocean was always salt, you know we have extremely little freshwater in the world right? compared to salt anyway, it's safe to say that salt is an extremely common compound

i don't know what you mean by the ocean could have evolved, it's simply the dissolved salt compounds in water and since salt is so common it is very likely that the ocean was always saltwater

 

[dredcon]

i don't, it's a good guess though, looking at the salt concentration in the ocean now, can you imagine all that salt not being in all that water? if not, the salt had to be piled up when all land was stuck together (pangea?) or hidden deep if not in the water, so i think it is very likely that the ocean was always salt, you know we have extremely little freshwater in the world right? compared to salt anyway

When the first fish evolved the oceans were only 1/4 as salty as the oceans are today.

 

[Fry]

When the first fish evolved the oceans were only 1/4 as salty as the oceans are today.

i don't know what salt concentrations make the water fresh, brackish, or salt, what would 1/4 today's salt concentration classify as? or does it not relate to current species of fish's habitation?

 

[Vitaliy]

You already posted on the matter...

http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19106&highlight=religion