20th December 2005, 2:59 PM
You're getting there.
Now start cross referencing what you have: The idea of mutation (DNA altering) with what we DONT know. The first thing you have to realize is that single celled organisms are why we evolve, why things change. A giraffe doesn't change, it's genetic material does.
Single celled organisms have been on Earth for billions of years. Now as we know, the longer a life form exists the more evolved it is. Or in other words, the better at its function it is. In fact they're so good at what they do they can survive in many extremes.
It is a fact that mutation is usually lethal. We see mutation all around us. My dog 6 toes on his back feet, my wife has blue eyes, there are people born missing vital organs or doubled-up organs, these are things we find out of sequence in the genetic material where an amino acid failed to connect on the molecular level or tried to compensate by connecting more than one to itself.
We also understand that by introducing new genes to an animal that has already been birthed will cause it to change. If for example you have genes that say your lungs are malformed we can introduce good genes that contain good lungs and slowly make your lungs better. This is called gene therapy and it's mostly a type of experimental alchemy and has caused more oddities than we understand.
Now take in to account the ideal of gene pools. A gene pool is a collection of genetic material. It's why there are different species, they have a gene pool that only contains what that species has been formed from. Mammals come from a long line of change and we contain in our gene pool just about every life form on this planet. You can even see this in the stages of a fetus.
Let's make it super simple starting with life in the ocean:
From the get go there are two major schools of life. One that says the small and the quick and the other that says the large and the powerful. (we find this on a cellular level as well). Giant arthropods ruled the oceans, huge and crab like and were probably the first things to explore land which brought on the on set of insect species (a crab is the same as a cock roach) and started looking for food, since the small and quick haven't really tried to explore land, the arthropods found themselves looking at mass amounts of vegitation. Meanwhile in the oceans, the small and quick were doing their best to stay away from the arthoropods finding ways to mate, lay eggs and continue a survival pattern. That survival pattern eventually lead to the idea of spawning outside the realms of the predatory arthropods which meant laying eggs in shallow waters or swimming up streams in to lakes of fresh water and finally on land.
By the time the small and quick fish started evolving ways of locomotion on land the arthropods were watching their empire degrade. Because of the lower oxygen levels and their huge exoskeletons they became smaller and smaller. They in turn became the small and quick while the fish slowly grew in to the idea of spending more time on land than the water. The simple reason is that the plant life on land was in such over abundance that it would be stupid not to try to spend more time on land.
Within a few million years fish were already walking and adapting lungs (the same principal of gills) and even caught on to the idea of eating other fish, amphibian or the newest animal type; reptiles or 'permanent land based fish'
Now:
- Arthorpods are small and quick insects
- Because massive arthorpods have evolved on or died off, the ocean is becoming a very large bullying system for fish.
- Amphibians have to stay close to water and mostly adapt the small and quick lifestyle (though there are 'hippo-like' amphibians) who now deal with predators from arthropods and fish
- Reptiles run amok with no predator and eat fish, amphibian and mostly arthropods and vegitation.
And then the nature invented the perfect creature. A tiny reptile that worked on a completely new system of being able to generate it its own heat and become EXTREMELY predatorial. It ate small insects and rarely ate vegitation (vegitation wouldn't sustain its internal workings and the ability to keep the body burning energy). It was the first warm blooded animal and it had many features never thought of before. It's hips were backwards meaning that the legs are backwards making the animal extremely springy (perfect for jumping and catching insects as well as running for long periods and fast speeds) it also had the ability to use its hands for grabbing, ripping and even carrying.
This particular animal evolved out of the ideal of a paradise with bounties of fast-moving food. With no natural predators around and the ability to escape most dangers it hit the big time. This was the first dinosaur and what would eventually lead to mammals.
There is now a huge eco system on land. With an order from lower to higher predators and prey with one little exception; the dinosaurs. But we're no where near T-Rex or anything like that. The jurassic period is hundreds of millions of years away. The warm blooded reptiles adapted in every way possible. You had lone hunters, pack hunters, herd followers, grazers and of course super predators who simply ate everyone. Go forward in time a little bit and Earth looked pretty much like it is now except instead of mammals being king, it was the warm blooded reptiles.
Then it happened, a major droubt. It killed everything, well almost. The only things that survived were the small and the quick who had other ways of gaining water. The reign of the mammal-like lizards was over and the dinosaurs took control. As the plant eaters grew in size so did the meat eaters. Why did the plant eaters grow? That's easy, ever seen a sumo wrestler?
Take one average Japanese baby. Now normally it would grow to be around 5 foot and pretty lanky like a normal human being is expected to look. But if you continue feeding that baby in vast quanities, foods huge in proteins and fats, as the baby develops it will grow a larger body. By the time it's an adult, you'll be looking at a 7 foot tall 600 pound human being with the strength of 20 men. Now if you did this to every baby on Earth and did it over and over and over eventually we would be born with these new body types without having to force it. All human beings would look like sumo wrestlers (which is exactly what happened during the last ice ages). So dinosaurs with no predators sitting in vast amount of vegitation did nothing but eat all day and grow to obscene sizes. Meat eaters started developing packs to take down the huge prey. Over time the meat eaters got larger and the packs got smaller until eventually you had a meat eater that could take down one of these behemoths by itself. Some plant eaters grew smaller with better defenses like armor plating, horns, etc, while others took the route of growing so large that nothing could take them down and then we have seizemasaur and ultrasaur who are basically living Empire State buildings. Nothing could take these things down.
And the super predators kept growing, these were invincible animals. Perfect in every way, but the worst possible thing happened: change. Plant life was evolving too, altering itself to survive the onslaught of things that eat them. These massive perfect plant eaters could only eat specific plant types and with none of it easy to find they slowly, over hundreds of thousands, millions of years, die off. The predators tried to stick around but without the major food sources they simply could not sustain themselves.
The world returned to the small and the quick. And during this huge era of dinosaurs, those small warm blooded reptiles had been evolving too. They were extremely resourceful and could hide and evade like nobody's business. Their heart rates were faster, they ate anything, almost entirely omnivorous and they could be found everywhere on Earth. These were the first mammals. Small and kind of rodent like, they were the new kings and they hunted and killed the warm blooded reptiles, though most of the smaller predatory dinosaurs started messing with the idea of living in trees and eventually trying to glide instead of jump. Skip ahead and you have birds (warm blooded reptiles) but for now they're just frightened raptors.
Just like the first dinosaurs the mammals had a world to itself. No specific predators and all the food in the world and no where to go but up. The tiny rodents exploded, the more food you gave them, the bigger they got. But it's hyper eccelerated now. A fast heart with tons of oxygen meant a super factory for cells. So when the animal needed a new way of life, evolution could happen faster and more precise. A mouse in what became Kenya started jumping from tree top to tree top in search of large insects to feed it's super metabolism, it gained stretches of skin to glide and started to find it could control it's glide, within a mere few hundred thousand years it's a flying mammal with absolute flight control. Reptiles adopted the same means, but having a cold blooded system meant it would never have enough of an energy spurt to have controlled flight, so it stuck with gliding.
Some of these tiny mammals grew in to a family called Hylobatidae. Imagine a mouse with a huge brain and the ability to use its hands for just about anything it needed even the creation of simple tools such as using a tree branch to hit predators from a distance. Eventually these guys would hit Hominidae which is where we came from. These were simply a form of Hylobatidae on a larger scale, more lethargic and relaxed but much much bigger.
Now back to the gene pool thing. Looking at our own genes we can see everything:
* single celled organisms and multi celled, plant life, simple organisms etc
* Simple fish forms (at one point during pregnancy, you can actually see the fetus with gills) First brain is formed. "fish brain"
* More complicated structure, lungs are formed here, the amphibian - lizard phase. "Reptile brain" (the fetus will also take on characteristics in this stage that are related to birds, we're litteraly watching the history of our DNA)
* Mammalian properties are introduced to include the largest base of the structure of genetic property in the hylobatidae family "mammal brain"
* Final Homo genus properties mostly to do with final layer of brain, a small patch on the frontal lobes. "Human brain"
Inside the egg of a lizard, we can watch it go through the stages of simple organisms to a fish stage, through amphibian and then forming the final structures of lungs and a more complciated digestive system. It never goes in to mammalian forms because lizard were never mammals at any time, they are 'land based fish'.
So since our gene pool contains just about everything save for arthorpods (this is because we come from a long line of DNA history going all the way back to the best survivors of the small and quick mentality being the fish and first complex organisms of Earth and arthropods designed from completely different structures) we have a massive library to work with. But since all the genes are there how does it know to make a specific animal type? That's easy, in the cells they have a thumbprint that makes them unique. That thumbprint is a data string that dictates what genes are turned off and what's turned on. Taking the DNA of a person, you could hypothetically make just about every animal on Earth. Taking DNA of an insect, you are limited to arthopods. Arthropods have always been arthropods, you of course have a shit ton of arthropods to deal with in the genes everything from fleas to spiders to mantids to you name it, every bug in the world comes from one specific gene pool which is why they're so much better than us and will outlive us long after we evolve on or die off.
Every change we ever went through whether it be extreme or subtle is in our genes which we can look at like rings on a tree. If the thumbprint that says 'build a human being' fails, it might end up using a throwback gene or a 'off' gene. Since the human isnt designed for that older structure, it falls apart. If that restructured DNA is not harmful it can be passed on but may lead to eventual problems. For example, blue eyed people are far more likely to need prescription glasses.
But in the end, mutation is formed from what is already there and is retarded. Frogs with multiple limbs is a good example. All schools of thinking will tell you that mutation is almost always harmful or fatal, and to suggest that such a retardation of existing genes would lead to a new gene sequence is rediculous. new gene sequences come from slow development, not sudden retardation. That slow development is as easy as doing something over and over and getting better at it. That is evolution.
If you put fleas in a jar filled with water and gave them a food source and left them there for a few thousand years, they would become water bugs. They would be adapted to swimming and have physical characteristics such as longer 'rowing' legs. If you deer on an open plain where the best food is found in high tree tops, they would develop longer necks (the length of deer necks changes constantly through the world, some have short necks because the ground is at their feet, some have longer necks because the food is up higher and then ultimately you have giraffes which are deers with the longest neck in the animal kingdom). But far more interesting is that completely different species (dinosaurs) evolved to the same conclusion. We know this because there are species on this planet that are genetically near 100% matches but have physical characteristics that are different because of difference in environment. The differences on a genetic level are so small that it's baffling us and often difficult to find. Mutation is easy to find because it's a retardation of existing genetic structure, evolution between environment of the same species produces a change that is so small on the genetic level, but huge on the physical side of things that we simply cannot explain it with science yet, our tools have only uncovered the first few thousand layers of it all of an infinitely layered subject.
from BBC news:
'New' giant ape found in DR Congo
A mountain gorilla and infant, AP
The new ape has some gorilla (pictured) characteristics
Scientists believe they have discovered a new group of giant apes in the jungles of central Africa.
The animals, with characteristics of both gorillas and chimpanzees, have been sighted in the north of the Democratic Republic of Congo.
According to local villagers, the apes are ferocious, and even capable of killing lions.
A report about the mysterious creatures is published in this week's edition of the UK magazine New Scientist.
If they are a new species of primate, it could be one of the most important wildlife discoveries in decades.
The discovery of these apes "reveals just how much we still have to learn about our closest living relatives," New Scientist says.
'NEW' GIANT APE
Large, black faces (like gorillas)
Up to two metres tall (6.5ft)
Weigh 85kg-102kg (187lb-224lb)
Males make nests on the ground (like gorillas)
Diet rich in fruit (like chimps)
They stand up to two metres tall, the size of gorillas, and like gorillas, they nest on the ground, not in trees.
But they live hundreds of km away from any other known gorilla populations, and their diet is closer to that of chimpanzees.
Primatologist Shelly Williams is thought to be the only scientist to have seen the apes.
During her visit to DR Congo two years ago, she says she captured them on video and located their nests.
She describes her encounter with them: "Four suddenly came rushing out of the bush towards me," she told New Scientist.
"If this had been a bluff charge, they would have been screaming to intimidate us. These guys were quiet. And they were huge. They were coming in for the kill. I was directly in front of them, and as soon as they saw my face, they stopped and disappeared."
Mystery
The discovery has baffled scientists. There are three controversial possibilities to explain the origin of the mystery apes:
* They are a new species of ape
* They are giant chimpanzees, much larger than any so far recorded, but behave like gorillas
* They could be hybrids, the product of gorillas mating with chimpanzees.
So far, researchers have little to go on, but they now plan to return to northern DR Congo to study the apes further.
In the meantime, there are fears that unless measures are taken to protect them, poaching could threaten this new group of primates before the mystery of their identity is resolved.
"This is a lawless area," says Kenyan-based Swiss photographer Karl Ammann, who tipped Ms Williams off about the apes.
"The government has practically no control over hunting. If we found something interesting it would attract more investment. People would be more interested in conserving it."
From Wikipedia:
New Species?
Also in 2002, a new giant ape troop was discovered in the Democratic Republic of Congo. These apes share many features of both chimpanzees and gorillas. According to a report from BBC News Online [1], the apes have large black faces, are two meters tall and make nests on the ground, all like gorillas. However, they live hundreds of kilometers from any other gorilla troops, and their diet is high in fruits, similar to the chimpanzee diet.
Subsequent molecular investigation of hair and pelt samples showed them to be common chimps who had individually adapted to local conditions.
Obviously, this is being researched and studied up the whazoo. It is a previously unknown type of ape. Now, in order for a chimp to breed with a gorilla, we have to throw out everything we understand of inter-species mingling of DNA. We know for example, a cat cannot mate with a dog, the sperm will enter the egg, but nothing will form. But there are records of a false killer whale/dolphin hybrid formed in captivity. This is more founded since false killer whales and dolphins are essentially the same thing, but a monkey and ape are not the same thing, they have way too many differences in the genetic make-up to be compatible for offspring and even if it somehow did work, it would be a fluke just as the dolphin/false killer whale hybrid animal is. It should be noted that the false killer whale is classified as dolphin in its own family called Pseudorca.
Now full blown killer whales did split from one dolphin species many moons ago, but they have become genetic polar opposites. The same is found in bears and dogs, at one time there was one animal: called a beardog. It split and went on to form wolves or bears depending on the area and environment. if you put wolves in the mountains with sparse food, it wouldn't focus on hunting in packs, it would focus on finding new food sources. Fishing in the streams, springing an ambush on the occasional lone deer, looking in the trees for berries or bee hives full of honey and would become a loner. Eventually on this path, the wolf will grow larger, less agile and more bear like. This is what's happened to these chimps. They found themselves in the same mind set of gorillas and decided that living on the jungle floor was more beneficial than living in the trees. Over time, this 'less active, more food intake' lifestyle will make the animal larger - living on the jungle floor without the protection of trees cause the animal to consciously become more aggresive as they are attacked by more predators and engage them instead of using natural cover.
Again, all signs point to all life on Earth eminating from the first forms of life. It is true that the DNA changes, but mutation is not the answer. In the time of 300 thousand years, all mutations recorded from human beings occuring in human beings have been devastating and today we can see it happening and stop it before it's 'locked' so we can introduce different genes in to the fetus so that it wont be physically retarded. Evolution is th building of progression, everthing within the being works towards a common goal. if the food is fast, the animal becomes faster. Over time, it becomes physically faster. If the food requires strategy, the animal works in groups and out-thinks the food, over time, the animal becomes physically smarter.
Evolution is precursor to survival, evolve or die. Mutation is the precursor to death. We can mate a horse with a donkey and make a mule, but all mules are sterile and cannot reproduce.
You say "I am not your teacher", but if that's the case then why the heck did you even open your mouth to begin with? If you are going to make a claim you better be prepaired to back it up. I ask, perhaps not as kindly as I could, for you to tell me what I can look at. You have provided nothing but excuses. What am I supposed to think?
Yes, you're supposed to think. I'm not going to fetch websites for you as if i'm trying to prove anything because I dont have to, go think, go find. you're doing a good job without someone handing you the info. The reason I opened my mouth or typed out a post was because i want to share my knowledge and opinions and hopefully find good conversation with a sharing of ideals. Not a soap box yelling match where we have to prove what we say, especially when we're talking about something all based on theories other than the fact the results can be proven but the how and why cannot.
You insist on showing me other people's opinions like it matters somehow when what i'm looking for is yours. The best minds can produce theories full of unexplained holes and the popular ones (or the least controversial) are brought to light, i'm asking you to use your judgement and fill those holes with something that does work instead of preaching the values of someone else's proposed theories. Then we can discuss how it could work and create our own theory. Not once have you tried to disprove my theory, you simply regurgitate other people's opinions which are full of shit and barely explain anything. Instead, show me how it doesn't or does work in your own judgement and opinion. Then, and only then, do we start comparing notes from what other people have figured out.
What i'm saying has nothing to do with religion or faith, it can be seen every day, you can watch it happen, it is palpable and real. It doesn't involve any kind of unexplained syndrome where you need to place trust in something that cannot be proven or disproven.
To say that random acts of mutation that occur for unknown reasons will 'eventually' cause an animal to become more suited to its environment is simply rediculous and requires a type of faith in order it for it to work. Single celled organisms and viruses can do it damn near instantly because they're perfect little machines that hold DNA. They start dying out, they face extinction and whoosh, they're airborne within a few years or even hours. Every mammal is at best around 200 million years old (not officially) so the process is much slower and not nearly as effective so i wouldn't be using cells or viruses as a good base of theory in the evolution of complicated organisms.
Now start cross referencing what you have: The idea of mutation (DNA altering) with what we DONT know. The first thing you have to realize is that single celled organisms are why we evolve, why things change. A giraffe doesn't change, it's genetic material does.
Single celled organisms have been on Earth for billions of years. Now as we know, the longer a life form exists the more evolved it is. Or in other words, the better at its function it is. In fact they're so good at what they do they can survive in many extremes.
It is a fact that mutation is usually lethal. We see mutation all around us. My dog 6 toes on his back feet, my wife has blue eyes, there are people born missing vital organs or doubled-up organs, these are things we find out of sequence in the genetic material where an amino acid failed to connect on the molecular level or tried to compensate by connecting more than one to itself.
We also understand that by introducing new genes to an animal that has already been birthed will cause it to change. If for example you have genes that say your lungs are malformed we can introduce good genes that contain good lungs and slowly make your lungs better. This is called gene therapy and it's mostly a type of experimental alchemy and has caused more oddities than we understand.
Now take in to account the ideal of gene pools. A gene pool is a collection of genetic material. It's why there are different species, they have a gene pool that only contains what that species has been formed from. Mammals come from a long line of change and we contain in our gene pool just about every life form on this planet. You can even see this in the stages of a fetus.
Let's make it super simple starting with life in the ocean:
From the get go there are two major schools of life. One that says the small and the quick and the other that says the large and the powerful. (we find this on a cellular level as well). Giant arthropods ruled the oceans, huge and crab like and were probably the first things to explore land which brought on the on set of insect species (a crab is the same as a cock roach) and started looking for food, since the small and quick haven't really tried to explore land, the arthropods found themselves looking at mass amounts of vegitation. Meanwhile in the oceans, the small and quick were doing their best to stay away from the arthoropods finding ways to mate, lay eggs and continue a survival pattern. That survival pattern eventually lead to the idea of spawning outside the realms of the predatory arthropods which meant laying eggs in shallow waters or swimming up streams in to lakes of fresh water and finally on land.
By the time the small and quick fish started evolving ways of locomotion on land the arthropods were watching their empire degrade. Because of the lower oxygen levels and their huge exoskeletons they became smaller and smaller. They in turn became the small and quick while the fish slowly grew in to the idea of spending more time on land than the water. The simple reason is that the plant life on land was in such over abundance that it would be stupid not to try to spend more time on land.
Within a few million years fish were already walking and adapting lungs (the same principal of gills) and even caught on to the idea of eating other fish, amphibian or the newest animal type; reptiles or 'permanent land based fish'
Now:
- Arthorpods are small and quick insects
- Because massive arthorpods have evolved on or died off, the ocean is becoming a very large bullying system for fish.
- Amphibians have to stay close to water and mostly adapt the small and quick lifestyle (though there are 'hippo-like' amphibians) who now deal with predators from arthropods and fish
- Reptiles run amok with no predator and eat fish, amphibian and mostly arthropods and vegitation.
And then the nature invented the perfect creature. A tiny reptile that worked on a completely new system of being able to generate it its own heat and become EXTREMELY predatorial. It ate small insects and rarely ate vegitation (vegitation wouldn't sustain its internal workings and the ability to keep the body burning energy). It was the first warm blooded animal and it had many features never thought of before. It's hips were backwards meaning that the legs are backwards making the animal extremely springy (perfect for jumping and catching insects as well as running for long periods and fast speeds) it also had the ability to use its hands for grabbing, ripping and even carrying.
This particular animal evolved out of the ideal of a paradise with bounties of fast-moving food. With no natural predators around and the ability to escape most dangers it hit the big time. This was the first dinosaur and what would eventually lead to mammals.
There is now a huge eco system on land. With an order from lower to higher predators and prey with one little exception; the dinosaurs. But we're no where near T-Rex or anything like that. The jurassic period is hundreds of millions of years away. The warm blooded reptiles adapted in every way possible. You had lone hunters, pack hunters, herd followers, grazers and of course super predators who simply ate everyone. Go forward in time a little bit and Earth looked pretty much like it is now except instead of mammals being king, it was the warm blooded reptiles.
Then it happened, a major droubt. It killed everything, well almost. The only things that survived were the small and the quick who had other ways of gaining water. The reign of the mammal-like lizards was over and the dinosaurs took control. As the plant eaters grew in size so did the meat eaters. Why did the plant eaters grow? That's easy, ever seen a sumo wrestler?
Take one average Japanese baby. Now normally it would grow to be around 5 foot and pretty lanky like a normal human being is expected to look. But if you continue feeding that baby in vast quanities, foods huge in proteins and fats, as the baby develops it will grow a larger body. By the time it's an adult, you'll be looking at a 7 foot tall 600 pound human being with the strength of 20 men. Now if you did this to every baby on Earth and did it over and over and over eventually we would be born with these new body types without having to force it. All human beings would look like sumo wrestlers (which is exactly what happened during the last ice ages). So dinosaurs with no predators sitting in vast amount of vegitation did nothing but eat all day and grow to obscene sizes. Meat eaters started developing packs to take down the huge prey. Over time the meat eaters got larger and the packs got smaller until eventually you had a meat eater that could take down one of these behemoths by itself. Some plant eaters grew smaller with better defenses like armor plating, horns, etc, while others took the route of growing so large that nothing could take them down and then we have seizemasaur and ultrasaur who are basically living Empire State buildings. Nothing could take these things down.
And the super predators kept growing, these were invincible animals. Perfect in every way, but the worst possible thing happened: change. Plant life was evolving too, altering itself to survive the onslaught of things that eat them. These massive perfect plant eaters could only eat specific plant types and with none of it easy to find they slowly, over hundreds of thousands, millions of years, die off. The predators tried to stick around but without the major food sources they simply could not sustain themselves.
The world returned to the small and the quick. And during this huge era of dinosaurs, those small warm blooded reptiles had been evolving too. They were extremely resourceful and could hide and evade like nobody's business. Their heart rates were faster, they ate anything, almost entirely omnivorous and they could be found everywhere on Earth. These were the first mammals. Small and kind of rodent like, they were the new kings and they hunted and killed the warm blooded reptiles, though most of the smaller predatory dinosaurs started messing with the idea of living in trees and eventually trying to glide instead of jump. Skip ahead and you have birds (warm blooded reptiles) but for now they're just frightened raptors.
Just like the first dinosaurs the mammals had a world to itself. No specific predators and all the food in the world and no where to go but up. The tiny rodents exploded, the more food you gave them, the bigger they got. But it's hyper eccelerated now. A fast heart with tons of oxygen meant a super factory for cells. So when the animal needed a new way of life, evolution could happen faster and more precise. A mouse in what became Kenya started jumping from tree top to tree top in search of large insects to feed it's super metabolism, it gained stretches of skin to glide and started to find it could control it's glide, within a mere few hundred thousand years it's a flying mammal with absolute flight control. Reptiles adopted the same means, but having a cold blooded system meant it would never have enough of an energy spurt to have controlled flight, so it stuck with gliding.
Some of these tiny mammals grew in to a family called Hylobatidae. Imagine a mouse with a huge brain and the ability to use its hands for just about anything it needed even the creation of simple tools such as using a tree branch to hit predators from a distance. Eventually these guys would hit Hominidae which is where we came from. These were simply a form of Hylobatidae on a larger scale, more lethargic and relaxed but much much bigger.
Now back to the gene pool thing. Looking at our own genes we can see everything:
* single celled organisms and multi celled, plant life, simple organisms etc
* Simple fish forms (at one point during pregnancy, you can actually see the fetus with gills) First brain is formed. "fish brain"
* More complicated structure, lungs are formed here, the amphibian - lizard phase. "Reptile brain" (the fetus will also take on characteristics in this stage that are related to birds, we're litteraly watching the history of our DNA)
* Mammalian properties are introduced to include the largest base of the structure of genetic property in the hylobatidae family "mammal brain"
* Final Homo genus properties mostly to do with final layer of brain, a small patch on the frontal lobes. "Human brain"
Inside the egg of a lizard, we can watch it go through the stages of simple organisms to a fish stage, through amphibian and then forming the final structures of lungs and a more complciated digestive system. It never goes in to mammalian forms because lizard were never mammals at any time, they are 'land based fish'.
So since our gene pool contains just about everything save for arthorpods (this is because we come from a long line of DNA history going all the way back to the best survivors of the small and quick mentality being the fish and first complex organisms of Earth and arthropods designed from completely different structures) we have a massive library to work with. But since all the genes are there how does it know to make a specific animal type? That's easy, in the cells they have a thumbprint that makes them unique. That thumbprint is a data string that dictates what genes are turned off and what's turned on. Taking the DNA of a person, you could hypothetically make just about every animal on Earth. Taking DNA of an insect, you are limited to arthopods. Arthropods have always been arthropods, you of course have a shit ton of arthropods to deal with in the genes everything from fleas to spiders to mantids to you name it, every bug in the world comes from one specific gene pool which is why they're so much better than us and will outlive us long after we evolve on or die off.
Every change we ever went through whether it be extreme or subtle is in our genes which we can look at like rings on a tree. If the thumbprint that says 'build a human being' fails, it might end up using a throwback gene or a 'off' gene. Since the human isnt designed for that older structure, it falls apart. If that restructured DNA is not harmful it can be passed on but may lead to eventual problems. For example, blue eyed people are far more likely to need prescription glasses.
But in the end, mutation is formed from what is already there and is retarded. Frogs with multiple limbs is a good example. All schools of thinking will tell you that mutation is almost always harmful or fatal, and to suggest that such a retardation of existing genes would lead to a new gene sequence is rediculous. new gene sequences come from slow development, not sudden retardation. That slow development is as easy as doing something over and over and getting better at it. That is evolution.
If you put fleas in a jar filled with water and gave them a food source and left them there for a few thousand years, they would become water bugs. They would be adapted to swimming and have physical characteristics such as longer 'rowing' legs. If you deer on an open plain where the best food is found in high tree tops, they would develop longer necks (the length of deer necks changes constantly through the world, some have short necks because the ground is at their feet, some have longer necks because the food is up higher and then ultimately you have giraffes which are deers with the longest neck in the animal kingdom). But far more interesting is that completely different species (dinosaurs) evolved to the same conclusion. We know this because there are species on this planet that are genetically near 100% matches but have physical characteristics that are different because of difference in environment. The differences on a genetic level are so small that it's baffling us and often difficult to find. Mutation is easy to find because it's a retardation of existing genetic structure, evolution between environment of the same species produces a change that is so small on the genetic level, but huge on the physical side of things that we simply cannot explain it with science yet, our tools have only uncovered the first few thousand layers of it all of an infinitely layered subject.
from BBC news:
'New' giant ape found in DR Congo
A mountain gorilla and infant, AP
The new ape has some gorilla (pictured) characteristics
Scientists believe they have discovered a new group of giant apes in the jungles of central Africa.
The animals, with characteristics of both gorillas and chimpanzees, have been sighted in the north of the Democratic Republic of Congo.
According to local villagers, the apes are ferocious, and even capable of killing lions.
A report about the mysterious creatures is published in this week's edition of the UK magazine New Scientist.
If they are a new species of primate, it could be one of the most important wildlife discoveries in decades.
The discovery of these apes "reveals just how much we still have to learn about our closest living relatives," New Scientist says.
'NEW' GIANT APE
Large, black faces (like gorillas)
Up to two metres tall (6.5ft)
Weigh 85kg-102kg (187lb-224lb)
Males make nests on the ground (like gorillas)
Diet rich in fruit (like chimps)
They stand up to two metres tall, the size of gorillas, and like gorillas, they nest on the ground, not in trees.
But they live hundreds of km away from any other known gorilla populations, and their diet is closer to that of chimpanzees.
Primatologist Shelly Williams is thought to be the only scientist to have seen the apes.
During her visit to DR Congo two years ago, she says she captured them on video and located their nests.
She describes her encounter with them: "Four suddenly came rushing out of the bush towards me," she told New Scientist.
"If this had been a bluff charge, they would have been screaming to intimidate us. These guys were quiet. And they were huge. They were coming in for the kill. I was directly in front of them, and as soon as they saw my face, they stopped and disappeared."
Mystery
The discovery has baffled scientists. There are three controversial possibilities to explain the origin of the mystery apes:
* They are a new species of ape
* They are giant chimpanzees, much larger than any so far recorded, but behave like gorillas
* They could be hybrids, the product of gorillas mating with chimpanzees.
So far, researchers have little to go on, but they now plan to return to northern DR Congo to study the apes further.
In the meantime, there are fears that unless measures are taken to protect them, poaching could threaten this new group of primates before the mystery of their identity is resolved.
"This is a lawless area," says Kenyan-based Swiss photographer Karl Ammann, who tipped Ms Williams off about the apes.
"The government has practically no control over hunting. If we found something interesting it would attract more investment. People would be more interested in conserving it."
From Wikipedia:
New Species?
Also in 2002, a new giant ape troop was discovered in the Democratic Republic of Congo. These apes share many features of both chimpanzees and gorillas. According to a report from BBC News Online [1], the apes have large black faces, are two meters tall and make nests on the ground, all like gorillas. However, they live hundreds of kilometers from any other gorilla troops, and their diet is high in fruits, similar to the chimpanzee diet.
Subsequent molecular investigation of hair and pelt samples showed them to be common chimps who had individually adapted to local conditions.
Obviously, this is being researched and studied up the whazoo. It is a previously unknown type of ape. Now, in order for a chimp to breed with a gorilla, we have to throw out everything we understand of inter-species mingling of DNA. We know for example, a cat cannot mate with a dog, the sperm will enter the egg, but nothing will form. But there are records of a false killer whale/dolphin hybrid formed in captivity. This is more founded since false killer whales and dolphins are essentially the same thing, but a monkey and ape are not the same thing, they have way too many differences in the genetic make-up to be compatible for offspring and even if it somehow did work, it would be a fluke just as the dolphin/false killer whale hybrid animal is. It should be noted that the false killer whale is classified as dolphin in its own family called Pseudorca.
Now full blown killer whales did split from one dolphin species many moons ago, but they have become genetic polar opposites. The same is found in bears and dogs, at one time there was one animal: called a beardog. It split and went on to form wolves or bears depending on the area and environment. if you put wolves in the mountains with sparse food, it wouldn't focus on hunting in packs, it would focus on finding new food sources. Fishing in the streams, springing an ambush on the occasional lone deer, looking in the trees for berries or bee hives full of honey and would become a loner. Eventually on this path, the wolf will grow larger, less agile and more bear like. This is what's happened to these chimps. They found themselves in the same mind set of gorillas and decided that living on the jungle floor was more beneficial than living in the trees. Over time, this 'less active, more food intake' lifestyle will make the animal larger - living on the jungle floor without the protection of trees cause the animal to consciously become more aggresive as they are attacked by more predators and engage them instead of using natural cover.
Again, all signs point to all life on Earth eminating from the first forms of life. It is true that the DNA changes, but mutation is not the answer. In the time of 300 thousand years, all mutations recorded from human beings occuring in human beings have been devastating and today we can see it happening and stop it before it's 'locked' so we can introduce different genes in to the fetus so that it wont be physically retarded. Evolution is th building of progression, everthing within the being works towards a common goal. if the food is fast, the animal becomes faster. Over time, it becomes physically faster. If the food requires strategy, the animal works in groups and out-thinks the food, over time, the animal becomes physically smarter.
Evolution is precursor to survival, evolve or die. Mutation is the precursor to death. We can mate a horse with a donkey and make a mule, but all mules are sterile and cannot reproduce.
You say "I am not your teacher", but if that's the case then why the heck did you even open your mouth to begin with? If you are going to make a claim you better be prepaired to back it up. I ask, perhaps not as kindly as I could, for you to tell me what I can look at. You have provided nothing but excuses. What am I supposed to think?
Yes, you're supposed to think. I'm not going to fetch websites for you as if i'm trying to prove anything because I dont have to, go think, go find. you're doing a good job without someone handing you the info. The reason I opened my mouth or typed out a post was because i want to share my knowledge and opinions and hopefully find good conversation with a sharing of ideals. Not a soap box yelling match where we have to prove what we say, especially when we're talking about something all based on theories other than the fact the results can be proven but the how and why cannot.
You insist on showing me other people's opinions like it matters somehow when what i'm looking for is yours. The best minds can produce theories full of unexplained holes and the popular ones (or the least controversial) are brought to light, i'm asking you to use your judgement and fill those holes with something that does work instead of preaching the values of someone else's proposed theories. Then we can discuss how it could work and create our own theory. Not once have you tried to disprove my theory, you simply regurgitate other people's opinions which are full of shit and barely explain anything. Instead, show me how it doesn't or does work in your own judgement and opinion. Then, and only then, do we start comparing notes from what other people have figured out.
What i'm saying has nothing to do with religion or faith, it can be seen every day, you can watch it happen, it is palpable and real. It doesn't involve any kind of unexplained syndrome where you need to place trust in something that cannot be proven or disproven.
To say that random acts of mutation that occur for unknown reasons will 'eventually' cause an animal to become more suited to its environment is simply rediculous and requires a type of faith in order it for it to work. Single celled organisms and viruses can do it damn near instantly because they're perfect little machines that hold DNA. They start dying out, they face extinction and whoosh, they're airborne within a few years or even hours. Every mammal is at best around 200 million years old (not officially) so the process is much slower and not nearly as effective so i wouldn't be using cells or viruses as a good base of theory in the evolution of complicated organisms.