Swallows evolve shorter wings to avoid cars, study suggests

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I heard about this on Coast to Coast again of course. The are a few reasons i was curious about this...

1. They evolved shorter wings.

Does this support evolution theory, and in such a short period of time?


He and colleague Mary Bomberger Brown from the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, know for a fact that the bird population overall has shorter wings today than it did when the researchers first started studying it in 1982 and the road-killed birds have longer wings than average.


2. Our impact on our environment is incredible.

From what i personally observe in the universe i have noticed that everything will balance out, it has to in order for it to work. So my question is, when is nature going to balance us out?

Source...




posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
If wingspan affects the ability to get out of the way of trouble and given the swifts i see are strafing into groups of insects who may be near roads and so they dive in to grab some insects from the lay by but unfortunately they don't notice the 40 ton truck in the way and whammo, so the shorter winged ones who have a better chance of avoiding the truck survive well that atleast proves basic darwinian principles



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 


I know it's not the same thing.....but I noticed the last 12 months that bird's in my area normally only heard during the day are singing at all hour's through the night...so I looked into the reason's why.

Apparently it's a combination of light pollution during the night and also because of noise pollution during the day forcing the bird's to sing at night time to be heard and attract a mate.

I agree....the impact we have on our environment is immense!



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   
This is not evolution. This is adaptation.

These birds are not a new species. Genetics create shorter humans and humans with shorter arms, does that mean that those humans "evolved" for some purpose? No. It doesn't.

And for scientists to assume that it is because of cars?
Where in the blue hell do they get these assumptions anymore?



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   
yeah, exactly, adaptation, no surprise there, not evidence of evolution into a new species



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheNewRevolution
This is not evolution. This is adaptation.

These birds are not a new species. Genetics create shorter humans and humans with shorter arms, does that mean that those humans "evolved" for some purpose? No. It doesn't.

And for scientists to assume that it is because of cars?
Where in the blue hell do they get these assumptions anymore?


yep, sounds pretty preposterous



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by TheNewRevolution
 


Adaptation is evolution.
Evolution is a slow process born by adaptation to the environment.

Religious bias?
edit on 22-3-2013 by Toadmund because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toadmund
reply to post by TheNewRevolution
 


Adaptation is evolution.
Evolution is a slow process born by adaptation to the environment.

Religious bias?
edit on 22-3-2013 by Toadmund because: (no reason given)



evolution stands and falls on becoming a new species, which clearly this does not show- humans have grown considerably in the last 100 years, this is not macro evolution either. I realise that this would, in theory, take a helluva long time, and as such, it will just be yours (and others) beliefs


FUNDAMENTALIST BIAS?
edit on 22-3-2013 by Credenceskynyrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheNewRevolution
This is not evolution. This is adaptation.

These birds are not a new species. Genetics create shorter humans and humans with shorter arms, does that mean that those humans "evolved" for some purpose? No. It doesn't.


Yeah, OP - your title is misleading. Nowhere in the article do they suggest this is evolution, but they specifically call it an adaptation, which is what it is.



And for scientists to assume that it is because of cars?
Where in the blue hell do they get these assumptions anymore?


That does sound like a leap, but still a plausible theory. Do you have a better one?



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by redtic
 


No I do not have a better theory. However, I'm not one to make random theories about why species adapt without first fully understanding the adaptations.

It makes them more maneuverable so there are literally thousands of reasons such an adaptation would become necessary, avoiding traffic being one tiny little thing on that huge list. It just seems to me that where mankind wants credit, they will give it to themselves regardless of how realistic it may be.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
if i ran over darwin with my car
would that prove that evolution didn't happen??



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheNewRevolution
reply to post by redtic
 


No I do not have a better theory. However, I'm not one to make random theories about why species adapt without first fully understanding the adaptations.

It makes them more maneuverable so there are literally thousands of reasons such an adaptation would become necessary, avoiding traffic being one tiny little thing on that huge list. It just seems to me that where mankind wants credit, they will give it to themselves regardless of how realistic it may be.


I hardly think this is a random theory of theirs...

article
edit on 22-3-2013 by redtic because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 



I would think taht with this adaptation, we are seeing nature "balance" us out



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   
The ones that evolve breasts will get rides



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
A theory is that every creature has a field of bio-cognition. This would mean that what happens to the animal, gets recorded into the field. The next generation is born with a slight alteration based on what happend to it's parents. This would explain how a creature can develope defence mechanisims over successive generations. Just a thought could cause cellular change. Example: I sure would like to climb that tree, but can't. This thought is then imprinted into the field. This would then give rise to an offspring with a variation more suited to climbing.



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheNewRevolution
This is not evolution. This is adaptation.

These birds are not a new species. Genetics create shorter humans and humans with shorter arms, does that mean that those humans "evolved" for some purpose? No. It doesn't.

And for scientists to assume that it is because of cars?
Where in the blue hell do they get these assumptions anymore?


Humans are not getting shorter... The average has risen a lot in years, although I would not be surprised if it started to decrease due to bad nutrition.

Evolving starts with smaller adaptions, like what swallows had. You can not evolve to another species in 100 years. It takes time.



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


Automobiles have been around for oh, 127 years? Swallows (but apparently not other birds) have managed to adapt in that time by producing shorter wingspans "according to scientists" in their infinite wisdom.

Humans on the other hand have reportedly been around as homo sapiens for roughly 250,000 years according to these same scientists. You know what has been plaguing us that entire time? Tornados. Volcanos. Hurricanes. Earthquakes. Lightning. Wind. Rain.

I wonder, did we gain any new physical traits in those 250,000 years to combat such common things? Nope. One might argue that in the case of humanity, technology has taken up that role and made adaptation unnecessary, but at the same time that damn squirrel is still running across the road in front of me and everyone else and turning around at the last second. I don't see him or anything else adapting to automobiles.

So, to assume that swallows have adapted to automobiles is ignorance on scientists parts because they simply NEED to have an explanation, and instead of actually searching for the real explanation - modern science instead seeks to create ones. And the ones that are most popular are anything to do with human intervention, because it makes us as a race feel oh so more involved and powerful over the world around us.

Fact is, these scientists have no idea why SOME swallows developed shorter wings just why scientists can't tell you why some humans have shorter arms. I never said all humans are shorter or have shorter arms, I'm saying some do and it has nothing to do with adaptation it just has to do with genetic differences and the passing of traits.



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Life imitates art afterall:

Spearow evolves into... ...Fearow.

Gotta catch 'em all! Pokemon!


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 





new topics




 
4

log in

join