Picky female frogs drive evolution of new species in less than 8,000 years

UC Berkeley News Center ^ | 27 October 2005 | Robert Sanders

[Junior]

Those aren't "features." Try again.

[mlc9852]

Sorry, Junior. I forgot evos have no sense of humor. It was a joke.

[flevit]

evolution in regards to proceeding through species,genus, and kingdoms...(nothing limiting evolution) you asked me what limits evolution from proceeding to kingdoms-species, if there is none then it is limitless.

why should I assume evolution is limitless?

[Junior]

Try being more funny next time.

[mlc9852]

You mean we look like apes? Well, I don't. May have dated a couple, though. And they have funny feet (the apes - not the dates).

[b_sharp]

"A frog is a frog is a frog. What is your point? Did the frog sprout wings and fly? No? Hmmmm.....

You want big jumps at a higher taxon? Look at the fossil record. You want incremental cumulative change in the fossil record? Look at extant species.

You can't have it both ways.

Either you accept large saltation events, complain about extant species but accept the fossil record as evidence, or you accept the incremental cumulative change model (as we believe) but keep on whining about the 'gaps' in the fossil record. Either way, one has to be taken as evidence of evolutionary change.

[Theophilus]

Let's see. Rabid FReepers have accused people who accept evolution of being liberals, atheists, Christ/God-haters, Communists, Nazis, racists and now voyeurs?

I'm a "Rabid FReeper" but I haven't accused any biolgians of being "liberals, atheists, Christ/God-haters, Communists, Nazis or racists", and I was only kidding about them being "voyeurs" since none of them ever caught an evolving species in flagrante delicto.

[mlc9852]

Just so long as you don't say humans evolved from ape-like creatures.

[SeeRushToldU_So]

Yea right. Evolution never happened.

[highball]

Just so long as you don't say humans evolved from ape-like creatures.

No worries there - we didn't.

Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. I can see how you might get the two confused.

[Junior]

More than 150 years of evidence, ranging from paleontological and biological, to genetic, supported by evidence from a several other disciplines, including chemistry, physics, and geology. All this research has developed a picture of a tree of interconnected life stretching back nearly 4 billion years.

Believe it or don't. Not my problem. However your blindness to it does not negate its existence.

[flevit]

why do some scientist demand us to accept that which has not be demostrated?

[mlc9852]

You say we did. I say we didn't.

[js1138]

[From many - one.]

Nope, evolution does not have to be "upward and onwards"

A frog could evolve into an itty bitty blind parasite living in a fish intestine. None ever did that I know of, but most parasites and cave dwelling organisms seem more simple than their ancestors.

[Junior]

You are a tailless primate, just like the other great apes (chimps, bonobos, gorillas, orangutangs and gibbons). With them you share such features as brachiating limbs and grasping hands.

[b_sharp]

"Well, let's see. Humans evolved from apes or ape-like creatures so I would expect a frog to at least evolve into something more, well, grand. But in a few million more years, it might."

Our ancestors did it with small virtually imperceptible changes over tens of thousands of generations. We did not suddenly pop out of an ape ancestor's womb as a modern human. As has been explained many many times on this forum the speciation we see in cases such as the frog is exactly what the ToE predicts we would see.

[b_sharp]

"Because it's not really about evidence at all."

I agree. I would simply like a creationist or two to admit that.

[flevit]

I don't negate its existance, just relize its the explination and assumptions that differs, not the evidence itself.

[mlc9852]

I am a human being created to be a human being. Can't speak for you.