It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Modern proof of evolution.

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Came across this article:
Independent



An increasing number of African elephants are now born tusk-less because poachers have consistently targeted animals with the best ivory over decades, fundamentally altering the gene pool.

In some areas 98 per cent of female elephants now have no tusks, researchers have said, compared to between two and six per cent born tusk-less on average in the past.


For several generations, poachers have routinely targeted elephants with large tusks...thus unnaturally selecting for elephants with small or no tusks. So, as a matter of survival, more elephants are being born with small or no tusks. Obviously not a conscious decision on the elephants' part, but this is how breeding and predator/poachers have made things.

Any evolution deniers care to debate this?





posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie
I wonder how long it will take before the elephants turn into homosapiens..

edit on 26-11-2016 by Tucket because: grammar nazi



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

So you believe because elephants with larger tusks are targeted that as a matter of survival the elephants are now being born with smaller or no tusks

You're not understanding evolution correctly



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

Could it be possible that the elephants with smaller / no tusks are the ones surviving to breed...?



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

It's not exactly natural selection or evolution.

It's accidental genetic engineering

Not that it's a bad thing if Elephants can finally roam free from being poached



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

Now if mechanics can just grow a 3rd arm!

I would think like breeding dogs to get certain traits, the elephants that were 2-6% tuskless have been the survivors of the illegal ivory trade and have been the ones regenerating the population. In other words the particular genes that made them tuskless are now dominant in the population.

I am not sure how some other theories of evolution stand up, but is this a mechanism of evolution? I still don't see for example: dolphins changing to walk the lands.

edit on 26/11/16 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: spirit_horse
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

I am not sure how some other theories of evolution stand up, but is this a mechanism of evolution? I still don't see for example: dolphins changing to walk the lands.


But dolphins do not need to walk the lands. their environment suits them just fine.

In terms of elephant evolution, it works. The environment of elephants has changed to favor tuskless elephants. Poachers are part of the environment and have caused the change. They pass over tuskless elephants thus increasing their chances of breeding and decreasing the chances of full-tusked elephants from breeding. Textbook example.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: omniEther
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

So you believe because elephants with larger tusks are targeted that as a matter of survival the elephants are now being born with smaller or no tusks

You're not understanding evolution correctly


No, I believe that elephants with big tusks are killed. Elephants with smaller tusks, or better yet-no tusks, survive to breed. Elephants with small or no tusks breed with other elephants with small or no tusks. Thus, an increasing number of elephants with small to no tusks. Evolution.

Obviously, the poor elephants don't consciously realize why they are being targeted by a-hole humans. They aren't consciously breeding for these traits. It's an environmental factor that's forcing breeding for a selective trait. And that is exactly what evolution is. It doesn't happen overnight, but rather incrementally over generations. Condition/response.

Evolution.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

An animal changes its physical make up because it's main predator is killing off individuals with certain traits. That's absolutely natural selection. And it happens far quicker than mainstream science accepts.

I believe that part of the brains job on an individual level is to forecast changes that need to be made in order to produce offspring that have the right traits to survive. I'd go as far as to bet that in the last few decades, more elephant offspring have been born tuskless to mothers that do have tusks, than was the case in the past.. just my two cents, but it's always been my assumption and a debate Ive had many times. I think evolution happens in quick spurts as opposed to long slow drawn out changes in a lot of cases. Otherwise life would never have become so dynamic and vibrant.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie

originally posted by: omniEther
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

So you believe because elephants with larger tusks are targeted that as a matter of survival the elephants are now being born with smaller or no tusks

You're not understanding evolution correctly


No, I believe that elephants with big tusks are killed. Elephants with smaller tusks, or better yet-no tusks, survive to breed. Elephants with small or no tusks breed with other elephants with small or no tusks. Thus, an increasing number of elephants with small to no tusks. Evolution.

Obviously, the poor elephants don't consciously realize why they are being targeted by a-hole humans. They aren't consciously breeding for these traits. It's an environmental factor that's forcing breeding for a selective trait. And that is exactly what evolution is. It doesn't happen overnight, but rather incrementally over generations. Condition/response.

Evolution.


Thats not evolution thats CREATING A BREED similiar to Dogs.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

What do you think evolution is?

There's natural selection: chameleons with the best camouflage don't get eaten, thus free to breed and produce offspring with similar traits

And there's selective breeding: dogs with squishy snouts get purposely bred to other dogs with squishy snouts. Now I have a Boston Terrier.

Evolution.

Just sayin'.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:51 PM
link   
edit due to me being an idiot.....carry on
edit on pm1111201616America/Chicago26p09pm by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Tucket

I wonder how long it will take before the elephants turn into homosapiens..


That comes right after the crocoduck.




posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

I quoted that from your op



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist

It's still evolution. Natural Selection is just a mechanism of Evolution. One is a property of the other. Selective breeding is another mechanism of evolution similar to Natural Selection.

It's like flavors of ice cream. One is chocolate the other is strawberry. But they're both ice cream.

Sorry. I answered you before your edit.....

edit on 26-11-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Funny how the mutation was already there before it was needed. It's almost as if some fortune telling intelligence is guiding the process.

How else would you explain this grasshopper?



Or this little guy?




edit on 26-11-2016 by Bone75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

I know of no one who has said that adaptation doesn't exist or even natural election. they merely have statedthat believing that that leads to drastic change and an increase in complexity is Belief not science.

jaden



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

So I and my son's eat medium rare meat...that mean's my grandchildren should be born with incisor's and canine's and no molar's.

because


They aren't consciously breeding for these traits



I see...it's all as clear as mud.

Funny thing though, my grandparent's and the wifes ate more veggies than us...therefore my children should not have had incisors to begin with.

Your op title should lose the word "proof"



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

there is evidence for one and not for the other. one is science, the other is belief.

that's the difference.

jaden
edit on 26-11-2016 by Masterjaden because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join