Posted on 05/08/2006 1:17:07 PM PDT by mlc9852
Human interaction with animals could be causing evolution to go into reverse, says a report by the Royal Society, Britain's science academy.
A study of finches on the Galapagos Islands in the Pacific finches are the same birds that were said to have inspired Charles Darwin's groundbreaking work on evolution - has shown that some could be losing their distinctive beaks in response to living near humans.
Finches on the islands have developed different sizes of beak - but when people live in close proximity to the birds, their beaks revert to an intermediate size, the report says.
Andrew Hendry, a professor at McGill University in Montreal who led the study, told the Independent newspaper that the evolutionary split within the species was being reversed.
(Excerpt) Read more at english.aljazeera.net ...
Wow! Evolution has reverse! And we thought it only had one speed.
Further evidence that natural selection is true and macro-evolution is false.
Am I the only one who finds this a little suspect? Why would their beak sizes reverse so quickly? First of all, these birds have a much longer lifespan than the moths, so you wouldn't expect them to revert as quickly as the moths do.
Secondly, I wouldn't expect something as trivial as beak shape to so greatly impact the outlook of a species. With moths, you have a very clear selective advantage in camoflauge.
With beaks, you have a specialization, but change should occur slowly. Further, unless humans are destroying large swaths of habitat, the long-beaked birds should still have a survival advantage for their selected niche because they are best suited towards that food source (even if the other birds are best suited towards human habitation).
It is strange. Just wanted to see what everyone else thought about it.
Ok, then, give me a call when these birds devolve back into reptiles, or snails, or bacteria, or whatever it is you Evos claim they evolved from.
I see, the birds are ADAPTING to their surroundings. But it sure sounds like they are still finches to me.
Right, and wrong.
It is support for natural selection, since the beak size trait being selected for no longer matters, due to the introduction of new food sources (apparently).
This study says nothing about "macro-evolution". These birds were all members of the same species, which had been diverging, but now are not.
There are several (I think 14?) other species on the islands which HAVE diverged into separate species from a common ancestor.
Read the sources, and try not to be so ignorant next time you make a comment....
Correct. This study only intailed one species, which had appeared to be diverging, but were still able to produce viable offspring.
Just go on believing that as it makes you feel good -- regardless of the logical error you are making.
It's your thread. You tell us!
This has actually been observed; or is it speculation?
Then boy, he sure fooled Huxley! :)
http://www.americanscientist.org/template/IssueTOC/issue/346
The first article discusses the speciation. The link below, (although long, sorry!) is a reprint. There is ample evidence to support the common ancestor theory; although I am sure that since the process took a while, you will deny that it happened, since no humans "observed" it.
http://chiron.valdosta.edu/jbpascar/Courses/Biol1010/ExtraCreditActivities/American%20Scientist%20Online%20-%20Adaptive%20Radiation%20of%20Darwin's%20Finches.htm
All evolution is microevolution.
On THAT we can agree.
I've always said that evolution is not a theory; it is a model. No proof of evoulution there.
As for the second linked page, it 'cannot be found', just like proof for evolution.
I've always said that evolution is not a theory; it is a model. No proof of evoulution there.
As for the second linked page, it 'cannot be found', just like proof for evolution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.