Play online chess!

Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
From	Message
bobspringett 10-Aug-25, 15:46	Shiva 11:35 <So the very thing Andrew demanded, satisfied predictions, has occurred multiple times.> And not only in connection to specific species. One of his rhetorical questions was 'How do Evolutionists explain the Cambrian Explosion?" I never quite understood his argument there. I presume it was a reference to the appearance of so many different critters in a time too short for it to be achieved by natural selection and radiative adaption, but he never actually said so. I gathered the impression that he didn't know what he meant himself, but it was a phrase he picked up somewhere and taught himself to parrot. I recall telling him that the Cambrian Explosion was exactly what Evolutionary Theory would predict. Whenever there is a sudden change in conditions or a single significant change in a critter's capability, this can trigger a rapid change in entire ecologies. The Cambrian explosion was largely triggered by the development of sight. Even though early eyes were not up to 20/20 vision standard, they allowed food to be located at a distance instead of relying on touch or non-directional smell. This allowed animals to be more efficient hunters by swimming rather than relying on filter-feeding or crawling along the bottom of the seas. Critters who had these abilities prospered, even their most clumsy having a huge advantage over the older-style critters, so virtually any of their offspring could survive the first wave of mutation and adaption before competition grew to a level that snipped off the less fit twigs. For example; even a blind man could survive in the Garden of Eden, working purely by touch and smell. But once the breeding population climbs to a level that makes food scare, that blind man might not survive but perhaps some of his kids might, and inherit his orange hair. This gave some of the less fit branches the time to produce a more resilient clade. Result - rapid radiative evolution. Similarly, if a stable ecosystem survives (say) 150 million years, it's very hard for a new species to arise because every available niche would already be occupied by species exquisitely adapted to it and which would out-compete any newcomers. But smack the earth with an asteroid that changes ambient conditions dramatically, and the very specialisation of the previous species would act against them. This would allow the scavengers and newcomers the space and time to set up their own stable ecosystem. Sound familiar? Andrew never responded to that. I think he couldn't get past the old 'mano-a-mano' image of 'survival of the fittest' in every generation.
lord_shiva 10-Aug-25, 23:30	Sex Sexual reproduction was another Cambrian development, like strapping a JATO to evolution. Asexual reproduction doesn’t provide for such rapid morphological change. But yes, especially coupled with eyes… Lots of niche exploitation occurred within that very brief fifty million year span of time.
Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

GameKnot: play chess online, monthly chess tournaments, chess clubs, Internet chess league, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.