I 'believe' in Evolution

[Polaris]

100 years for humans. The typical generation for humans has actually been 15 years historically...where I live (depending on the ethnic group though), it is over 30....your sample would only actually be 700 years with a normal generation scale.

[The Grand Nudger]

What do you think this means? Why is it important how many human generations would pass in the same number of fruit fly generations?

[jonb]

You're using a size of 35 generations as an example? Are you fucking kidding me? Assuming even an equivalent generation of 100 (three times the current breeding average where I live), that is only a span of 3500 years. That's just simple Darwin at that point...you need generations in the tens of thousands to actually show microevolution, which is why bacteria is very much desired as a test subject.

Yes and the speed of reproduction or slowness there of is also an evolutionary factor, you really should lean about biology

[The Grand Nudger]

How do you propose that he do that while simultaneously denying the reality of biology's unifying principle? Honestly?

[Polaris]

You're using a size of 35 generations as an example? Are you fucking kidding me? Assuming even an equivalent generation of 100 (three times the current breeding average where I live), that is only a span of 3500 years. That's just simple Darwin at that point...you need generations in the tens of thousands to actually show microevolution, which is why bacteria is very much desired as a test subject.

Yes and the speed of reproduction or slowness there of is also an evolutionary factor, you really should lean about biology

Not a factor when you only use a sample of 35 generations (that's the argument you would make if the sample was in the thousands or tens of thousands). You can even use humans as a test subject with that time-frame....the evidence would start in the Medieval era, but pretty sure artistic works would actually work as a rough expression of human attributes over the years.

[The Grand Nudger]

There you are assuming that steady march bullshit again. "Well it happened for the fruit flies...why didn't it happen for us?"

[Polaris]

Just use the actual samples from microevolution studies and not from some high school biology class. Or is that too fucking hard for you?

[jonb]

Actually. It really does not. It's not like you're going to have a whole species all-of-a-sudden not want to mate with individuals with short dicks.

Have you ever heard of a thing called averages, only a small preference has a consequence.

[Polaris]

Actually. It really does not. It's not like you're going to have a whole species all-of-a-sudden not want to mate with individuals with short dicks.

Have you ever heard of a thing called averages, only a small preference has a consequence.

Which is the whole point of microevolution not really being evolution (there is a phase between the two, micro and macro but that's beyond the lifetime of humans...that phase is where you get great differentiation in a species but not to the point where it starts to evolve into a new species). It just takes care of itself....the beauty of Darwinian mechanics.

[jonb]

Yes and the speed of reproduction or slowness there of is also an evolutionary factor, you really should lean about biology

Not a factor when you only use a sample of 35 generations (that's the argument you would make if the sample was in the thousands or tens of thousands). You can even use humans as a test subject with that time-frame....the evidence would start in the Medieval era, but pretty sure artistic works would actually work as a rough expression of human attributes over the years.

Over thirty five generations there would be very little difference, and in art there is very little change in the ability of the artist.