Posted on 09/30/2022 11:07:22 AM PDT by BenLurkin
I would call it “local natural selection.” It may not be a permanent change, in a generation or two in the absence of radiation, the group might revert in color.
A critical point is reached when those in the group can only reproduce with each other, not from other groups, which indicates they have become a different species.
If the group migrates to where others without the change live, unless their change gives them a survival advantage, giving them an advantage over different group enough to replace them, the selection is not successful.
A successful mutation is ruthless in killing off those without the mutation, which is why most of them fail.
Is this actually evolution or is it actually adaptation? Or is there a difference?
**********************************8
I think there is a big difference. I think adaptation is probably real, and this might be an example of it.
However, There has not been one example of any species changing into another species. Apes are still apes. birds are still birds. and frogs are still frogs.
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.