Letters From Darwin - Selecting One Species From Another

in lettersfromdarwin •  7 years ago 

Ant.png

It is perhaps easy to see how natural selection can change features within a species, yet not so simple to understand how a particular animal can evolve into a completely different one.

In fact I have been told recently in the comment section of one of my Letters From Darwin articles, that there is absolutely zero evidence for cross-species evolution.

At the time I replied that there is indeed evidence, and I pointed to the fossil record, and rather facetiously told the person I was answering to, to look it up. However that struck me as rather lame, I started the whole series to elicit questions, and then when I get them, I answer them in a dismissive fashion.

I also realised that the fossil record is not good enough for a lot of people. This I believe is because there is a lot of guess work when analysing fossils, and this leads to the opinion that the very same guess work has been at play when it comes to evolution.

So, with all that in mind, I would like to now offer my humble attempt at highlighting the evidence, in order to convince the sceptics to at least pay heed to what I'm saying and to apply their own critical thinking to the subject.

Evolution Of A Colony

~ Insect Thought Experiment

Imagine for me a vast green field, in which there is located just a single mound of earth, containing a colony of ten legged, ant-like, insects.

The field you are imagining now, is on a mythical planet, where nothing but plants and this one colony of insects have evolved (or magically put there, it doesn't matter for now).

You observe the insects everyday, and you realise that as far as finding food is concerned, you see that they come out of their colony and turn left. They then travel to their food source, eat and then return to the colony. You notice that their left set of legs are shorter than their right set. This you realise, is why they always turn left to seek food, and never right.

After a while you notice that the food source to the left of the colony is getting scarce, now some of the ants are not getting enough food and are starving to death. You notice that rather than starve, some of the insects are starting to force themselves to turn right.

Some weeks pass and the number of insects that now turn right for food has grown, however most of the colony still turn left and fewer and fewer of them are getting any food.

More time passes and the colony now only exists of ants that can turn right. One day another observer comes to visit you, and you show them the insects and tell them that they used to be ants who only turned left, and how their legs restricted their right turning abilities.

Your new observer does not find your claims to difficult to believe, as all you are saying is that a change of habit caused these particular insects to survive. You also have told her how the legs of the old colony were unevenly biased and now they have biased the other way.

Again, your observer finds this easy to take in, and can imagine how what you claim to have occured, could actually happen.

Biological Lego

Lungs_of_Protopterus_dolloi_.png

Let us pause our thought experiment for a second to consider the case of the lungfish, the air breathing fish whom has a lung that has been adapted from a swim bladder.

As Darwin himself said, knowing facts such as these, he found it easy to imagine that a bear-like creature who spent more and more time in the water swimming with its mouth open to catch food (like certain species of bear today). Might slowly evolve into a whale-like creature that spent all of its time in the water.

~ Insect Thought Experiment cont.

So now we have a colony of insects who turn right, then perhaps the food on the right runs out, however there is food slightly higher up. At first some of the ants start to climb for the first time, there front feet start to differ in shape to their ground-dwelling cousins.

Now imagine a scenario where the food is across a small gap, some of the creatures start making jumps for it. As they jump they fold back some of their legs and then extend them in order to jump further.

Time passes and the jumping insects now have two middle legs, that are shorter and of a different shape to the rest of their legs. They are almost permanently flattened against their bodies. When the insects jump, the legs flex and pump, creating a larger and larger jump. Eventually the flexing turns into flapping, and the legs turn into wings.

This time some of the ground dwelling insects have survived, they have learned new ways to cross the gaps. Some of them cooperate and make insect bridges, others have started eating other types of food, changing the shape and size of their jaws, however you remain focused on the flying variety.

A Moment For Eternity

Of course within this thought experiment you are timeless, so you can happily watch these insects each and everyday for millions of years.

A particular group of the flying ones that still live near the original colony, are experiencing hardship. The climate has gotten a lot colder and they are having to travel a lot further for their food.

After doing a survey of the colony, you notice that some of the insects have a lot more scales on their bodies than others. You realise that the scaliest insects seem to be the ones that are surviving the best.

Whereas the lass scaly creatures can not fly in the cold for as long, so they tend to starve to death, as do their children.

Before long all of the insects in the colony have thick scales covering most of their bodies. The further they have to travel for food, the thicker their scales get, over millions of more years, you observe how their bodies grow to support the extra weight of their scales.

Then one day you realise that the scales more resemble feathers, and the creatures are much bigger than their original ancestors, and have a lot less legs, you are so bold to call this a kind of bird.

Now when another observer joins you, and you explain how these birds, once belonged to a colony of insects that could only turn left, it is much harder for him to believe you.

Real World Examples

Axolot_.png

OK, our thought experiment was crude, and of course, in the real world on earth, birds did not evolve from ants. However it was useful in order to get you to look at just one variable at a time, rather than trying to take in the big picture all at once.

There are many real life living examples of species evolving from one to another, from the aforementioned lungfish, to the fish with legs, the axolotl.

All of these examples contain appendages and organs that have clearly evolved from ones that their earlier progenitors possessed.

Whether it is the tail bone in humans, or the swim bladder in a dolphin, it all counts as evidence against some kind of instant creation event, and points to a shared ancestry between each and every organism on the planet.

This evidence can be witnessed right down to the genetic level, however you don't need fancy computers and microscopes to witness the very wonderful and very macro evidence that surrounds us each and every day of our beautifully evolved lives.

Further reading:

8 Scientific Discoveries That Prove Evolution is Real

Lungfish

Axolotl

Letters From Darwin:

Letters From Darwin - The Evolution Of The Eye

Letters From Darwin - An Evolutionary Coin Flip

Letters From Darwin - Understanding Probability With A Universe In A Box

Image sources:

Ant Photo by Mikhail Vasilyev on Unsplash

Axolotl By th1098 - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30918973

Lateral view of lungs of a dissected Spotted African lungfish (Protopterus dolloi) By Mokele at English Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9004707

IF YOU ARE A SCEPTIC OF CROSS-SPECIES EVOLUTION; HAS MY ARGUMENT HELPED? IF NOT ARE YOU PREPARED TO SEEK OUT THE FREELY AVAILABLE EVIDENCE? WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH ME OR NOT, AS EVER, LET ME KNOW BELOW!

Cryptogee

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

This paragraph here is the entire reason for the fictional story called the Theory of Evolution Hypothesis

"Whether it is the tail bone in humans, or the swim bladder in a dolphin, it all counts as evidence against some kind of instant creation event, and points to a shared ancestry between each and every organism on the planet."

In case you didn't know this is actually fraud and the fact that you write so well will in the end deceive multitudes. Pitting science against its reason for being is not science, and it is nihilistic and defeats the investigation because human beings emotions effect human beings efficiency. I don't believe is not how you start a investigation into physics and most importantly physical science. I don't know creates the correct understanding. That way the universe tells you how it works through your experiments. The experiment is the evidence and if you are not doing them for yourself and just believing the Gods of money will chew you up.

It is because your write so well that I know you have it within you to comprehend so that you can understand. Science is funny because you always think you know what the experiment will show you and the more experiments you do not only amazes you but tells you that you couldn't have planned anything like how this universe can be shown to work. Not in a million years. It takes a very short while for most to realize what the phrase "Nothing is free in the universe" actually means. The great question is where is all the energy we see in space coming from?

In each point in space is measured what is considered infinite energy. Where is it coming from? To eliminate creation as an explanation for this infinite energy coming from all points in space is like way to much speculation at this point in science. We got no clue really! The fraud is in the naming of hypothesis The Theory of take your pick. You have to do your own experiments without the speculation and there can be know expert but the experiment is King! I hope you comprehend that I do not intend to make you feel like I am assaulting you. It is the bias of the primes that so far haven't been proven. The in fact truth is evolution is not a physical science. There is no way to go back in time and confirm that what happens for those times in the past to know that what chemically and mechanically happens then is the same as now. According to the strict interpretation of science it is a religion because the beliefs are high and the experiments connecting the here and now with the billions of years of the past are none existent.

We don't know? Evolution is as much of a region as science is birthed by the christian faith.

Cool, thanks @steemstem bot! :0)

Cg

Great job at trying to convince the sceptics, (like me) but from my perspective, you've come up with another theory to fit in with a theory that you appear to believe is fact. Nothing you have written here proves cross-species evolution occurred but at least you acknowledge that the often cited proof of 'transitional fossils' are not really proof at all.

We could go around in circles all day about this and I'm pretty sure Occam's Razor would be pulled out of the hat at some point, but the fact remains that there is no evidence that proves that everything we see on planet earth today came from a single source. There is evidence that suggests it might be so but until the gaps in knowledge (and the fossil record) are filled we are in a situation where athiests 'believe' that evoltion explains how man got to where he is today but only because they completely rule out the possibility that there might have been a creator or designer.

Even if probability and Occam's Razor are used and the conclusion is reached that evolution is far more probable than the idea of a creator or designer, it does not change the fact that we do not 'know'. I might be misunderstanding what you are trying to say and if so I apologise.

Even your ant analogy doesn't explain anything other than how a species evolves within it's own species. The ant was still an ant whether it could jump, fly or hover, it didn't randomly mutate into something else entirely.

You seem to be making a similar argument that is made which suggests that if a monkey was given a typewriter and an infinite amount of time it would eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare (or something like that). Logically of course, it is difficult to argue with this because the probablility that something might happen is never zero but that isn't the sort of argument that will convince me that cross species evolution is a fact.

Great work though. I enjoy reading your stuff.

Loading...

If I believe in the evolution of living beings, even in ourselves, we may have the same physical traits but for example simple now children were not mentally what we were in our times, maybe technology will help to be more awake children, but in my opinion there is a continuous evolution, interesting article friend. Sorry for any error, I use translator since I don't speak english.

Awesome article, @cryptogee, as always.

I have one little note: although the axolotl is known as "walking fish", it is actually classified as amphibian. The cutest amphibian, if you ask me! 😊

Of course, I am not skeptical about the cross-species evolution or Earth's roundness.

Cheers! : )

One can also look at research done with fruit flies, where many generations and genetic inheritance can be viewed to gain insights in how genetics are passed on, and variations can spread in successive generations.
Your ant allegory does a good job of representing intuitively how environment can influence selection. That coupled with the observations that genes, our genetic instructions are passed on from generation to generation with occasional mutations, I personally think is enough to warrant at least a critical view.

Again, your observer finds this easy to take in, and can imagine how what you claim to have occured, could actually happen.

Have you deliberately misspelled Occurred...???or.... :D

Oops, that's one that gets me all the time, and the spellcheck in Draft can be a little slow sometimes... so not a deliberate mistake :-)

Cg

  ·  7 years ago (edited)

And I thought it was one of your hidden eggs...lolzzz... :3
Anyways I am glad to point it out...
I think I have found another typo error as I was going through your "Letters From Darwin" posts...
Please check The Evolution Of The Eye
I have left a comment there...

  ·  7 years ago (edited)

Oh, I really fancied this scientific article. I read some parts twice.
your articles are going really nice. I always love scientific writings.
I wanted to talk and write a lot on this subject. I guess at work I can not get too far away from work :)
Thanks, for good sharing..

in the meantime we miss your great arrangement contest :)

This is absolutely amazing and also great photography

Muted.

Cg

nice bro nice information

This post has been upvoted and picked by Daily Picked #4! Thank you for the cool and quality content. Keep going!

Don’t forget I’m not a robot. I explore, read, upvote and share manually :)

Thank you for sharing a good content with us @cryptogee .
Thumbs up!!!!

Thought experiment. Imagine in the real world that to make a claim one must also have physical evidence proving the claim. Imagine that in the real world people cannot go back in time to gather the physical evidence to prove their claim. Sadly that second imagined situation is actually the facts of our situation. Thus claims made about reality that a person could not possibly have been there to gather the physical evidence are really just imagined and thus not evidence. Evolution is a religion and the funny thing about it is that evolution has exactly imagination for spiritual evidence yet most will claim it is not a religion.

There's is plenty of physical evidence, in our DNA, in the fossil record, in living organism, we are quite literally surrounded by evidence. The thought experiments are just there to help you understand the evidence in front of you.

The DNA evidence supports Devolving and not evolution. The fossil record proves a living organism died and not if it had offspring. The second law of thermodynamics shows that all things go from a state of organization to a state of less organization, which means if there was a Big Bang everything exploded into organization and some 14.5 billion years later it is still organized enough to have life. Something is wrong with the logic here and in my opinion it isn't the evidence. Evolution is a religion. Science is not a vote or a consensus and believing in your experts is no different than believing in the pasture at a church. Just my opinion and I am glad it is at the bottom of your post cause I don't want to harm your blogging and am just sharing my own thoughts.

Loading...