(December 27, 2017 at 10:48 pm)Haipule Wrote:(December 27, 2017 at 9:52 pm)Whateverist Wrote: Trouble is "adaption" doesn't cover it. We're not talking about same generation changes, you're thinking of Lamarckism. (Long discredited.) Evolution is multigenerational and involves random mutation which rarely (but regularly over large enough samples of generations and/or time) out competes the status quo.
Yes but, to explain everything as "evolution" is too general.
And you would know that how? I really think you underestimate the power of evolution. The mutations are blind but the survival derby is not.
(December 27, 2017 at 10:48 pm)Haipule Wrote: Like the Hammerhead Shark which is not here by any standard evolutional thinking such as "Change Though Time" or "Adaption", but is an example of a dramatic morphological change/appearance that just appeared!
Every mutation "just appears", those with survival value have an advantage to pass on their DNA. That's it .. and it's enough.
(December 27, 2017 at 10:48 pm)Haipule Wrote: I could say that a hammerhead shark is a part of the whole of evolution but that word indicates something of a slow process that is not sudden. IOW's, I think evolution is a poor word to explain a sudden change.
How sudden was it and how do you know that? Frankly I doubt it and yet changes in the size of parts can be accomplished fairly easily in terms of just a small change in the directions for the embryo's assembly.
(December 27, 2017 at 10:48 pm)Haipule Wrote: And the so called, "Evolution of Man" appears to be the same way to me. The fossil record only shows sudden changes with out millions of missing link bones. Just one dramatic morphological change after another.
How do you know what is in the fossil record? A few million years is enough time to differentiate one species of chimp from another.
