It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The most important thing is that you cannot activate an ancestral characteristic unless the animal has ancestors. So if we can do this, it definitely shows that evolution works.
Originally posted by Helious
I Stopped reading the article when the arrogant morons said it is the last remaining animal alive. If they thought it has been extinct for 2 million years and they just found this one, why would they presume to know it is the last? Typical yet still infuriating when it comes to things like this.
Originally posted by spyder550
This is how science works. Unlike the bible in which all knowledge was finalized in the ironage. Science "evolves" based on new information gathered through experimentation and observation.
To be giddy with excitement because a new fact has emerged to to challenge an belief is what makes science worth while.
To be giddy with excitement because a new fact has arrived that challenges existing theory, because you think it strengthens you ironage beliefs about creation is childish (I could have gone with moronic or idiotic but that would be harsh)edit on 19-12-2012 by spyder550 because: (no reason given)
"This is how science works. Unlike the bible in which all knowledge was finalized in the ironage. Science "evolves" based on new information gathered through experimentation and observation."
Originally posted by rickymouse
Evolution can be reversed but certain conditions need to be in place. I read an article on that somewhere, it is why they think they can change a chicken back into a little T-rex or something.
Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by puncheex
Well, I understand what your saying but that doesn't explain some of the things that are happening, especially in the modifications we see in species around the world. They seem to toggle based on food available to develop a certain way. If this was a random mutation this would basically not occur well. Seems to me that the effect of the epigenomics would steer the mutations in a certain defined way. The epigenomics is a history of evolution to food. This means if the environment goes backwards the evolution could basically preferrably go into the same direction. If the environment goes forward in an unrecognized way, a mutation would most likely occur randomly.
I'm trying to use structured patterns that would likely occur in my thoughts. Figures like one in a thousand odds have to be taken into consideration but when dealing with food and the recorded history in our Genomics the odds will change. We are constantly evolving to our food. Right now we are making too many changes too fast which will force a random mutation of our DNA instead of a reversal because these changes in the food have not existed in our past. If everyone ate the same foods for many generations, we would slowly start all looking the same but our genetic disposition would interfere with our perception and we might fight more. To maintain civility, we must eat to match our genetics, trouble is that this was ignored throughout history and especially now so we are getting more kranky (German for sick).