According to science, how does a new species develop?

Votto

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2012
52,549
50,745
3,605
Well?

I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?
 
Science is for retards. Obviously God created two people. Then there was this talking snake. Some other shit happened. It was this whole mess.
 
I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?
The 'mutations' have to be inheritable through mating for a new species to develop.
 
If one of the mating eats genetically modified food, then mutations will undoubtedly be. The next generations will definitely grow a third ear. On the forehead.
:iyfyus.jpg:
 
Well?

I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?








Mutations occur all of the time. Most are benign and do nothing. Every now and then the mutation kills the critter, and even more rarely the mutation does nothing until some outside event comes along that makes that mutation important. The other critters vying for that particular niche die out because they lack that particular mutation, while the mutated critter takes over the niche. That is how evolution works.
 
Dogs can be bred for traits. We know dogs came from wolves. Wolves and dogs can still breed because they haven't diverged far enough. The biggest wolf can be bred with the smallest chihuahua. Obviously through artificial insemination. Keep it going for another million years and eventually, they won't be able to breed.
Instead of us doing the manipulation, the environment forces the adaptation. It's not a question of a new species developing, it's a single species diverging.
The transitions are all through nature. Why a donkey and a horse can mate, but they have diverged so far, the result is a mule which most of the time is sterile. Typical among species that have diverged. The offspring being mules in the sense of a lack of fertility.

Usually Republicans come up with "kind". A kind of cat can mate with another kind totally ignoring genetics and how chromosomes actually align.
 
Well?
I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?
Mutations are not required. What you need is isolation. If a mountain rises and splits a population into two, over time natural variations will change the two populations in different ways. Given enough time the two populations will not interbreed, even if the mountain is removed. Bingo, two species.
 
Dogs can be bred for traits. We know dogs came from wolves. Wolves and dogs can still breed because they haven't diverged far enough. The biggest wolf can be bred with the smallest chihuahua. Obviously through artificial insemination. Keep it going for another million years and eventually, they won't be able to breed.
Instead of us doing the manipulation, the environment forces the adaptation. It's not a question of a new species developing, it's a single species diverging.
The transitions are all through nature. Why a donkey and a horse can mate, but they have diverged so far, the result is a mule which most of the time is sterile. Typical among species that have diverged. The offspring being mules in the sense of a lack of fertility.

Usually Republicans come up with "kind". A kind of cat can mate with another kind totally ignoring genetics and how chromosomes actually align.

And that is one of my questions.

if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?

I'm mainly interested in real science, which is observation.

Have any new species been observed to have come about by the claimed scientific explanations?
 
if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?
The donkey and horse have a common ancestor but have diverged. They can still mate and produce viable offspring but there enough genetic difference that the offspring are sterile. What you're seeing is a snapshot in the process of the formation of new species (donkey and horse).
 
Well?

I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?
It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see
 
how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?


Cells don't give birth, they divide. One would think the simplest idea for "the first time" is that a cell divided ,as did another, and their progenies got together and functioned together.


if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?
Traveling backward back in time, each species ability to produce viable offspring with an ancestor of its line decreases, as a general rule. Should you travel back in time 10,000 years, you would probably do fine to have a baby with an "ancient human".. 100,000 years? Again, kids might usually live. 1 million years? Probably not so much.

While this is a general rule, you should get the idea.
 
Dogs can be bred for traits. We know dogs came from wolves. Wolves and dogs can still breed because they haven't diverged far enough. The biggest wolf can be bred with the smallest chihuahua. Obviously through artificial insemination. Keep it going for another million years and eventually, they won't be able to breed.
Instead of us doing the manipulation, the environment forces the adaptation. It's not a question of a new species developing, it's a single species diverging.
The transitions are all through nature. Why a donkey and a horse can mate, but they have diverged so far, the result is a mule which most of the time is sterile. Typical among species that have diverged. The offspring being mules in the sense of a lack of fertility.

Usually Republicans come up with "kind". A kind of cat can mate with another kind totally ignoring genetics and how chromosomes actually align.

And that is one of my questions.

if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?

I'm mainly interested in real science, which is observation.

Have any new species been observed to have come about by the claimed scientific explanations?
Who Is Actually Sapient Among the Homo Sapiens?

The n00bi's get treated like weirdos. Out of revenge, they eventually rise up, assert their fitness, and exterminate the unevolved masses.
 
Well?

I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?
You don’t get to ask that question. Right now NASA has plans to send probes to Europa and three other places where the three things necessary for life I think it was water energy and biology....


The point is these missions are shelved because you don’t care to know. Almost like you’d be sad to find life somewhere else
 
Well?

I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?
It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.
 
Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.
Ridiculously false...it is supported by all of the evidence, and all of the evidence is mutually supportive. So, if you are "taking it on faith", then you know less than nothing about this topic
 
Well?

I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?
It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.
You just sit around waiting for Armageddon. Meanwhile these scientists you doubt are looking for incoming meteors and will hopefully one day delay gods will and divert it because your prayers wont
 
how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?


Cells don't give birth, they divide. One would think the simplest idea for "the first time" is that a cell divided ,as did another, and their progenies got together and functioned together.


if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?
Traveling backward back in time, each species ability to produce viable offspring with an ancestor of its line decreases, as a general rule. Should you travel back in time 10,000 years, you would probably do fine to have a baby with an "ancient human".. 100,000 years? Again, kids might usually live. 1 million years? Probably not so much.

While this is a general rule, you should get the idea.
hey, do you sharpen axes so other people can split hairs?


why would a cell divide into predator and prey?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top