COMMENT 233799
|
2011-11-17 02:01 PM |
|
Very interesting. I enjoy reading up on evolution, and am excited to see it take place first hand. I believe if more people studied evolution and the likes of Darwin and Dawkins, we wouldn't be having all these religious wars. I am a firm believer in science and am glad to hear this discovery happened locally. Keep us posted.
|
| |
COMMENT 233932P
|
2011-11-17 09:03 PM |
|
I wonder if it is a single gene that controls that, and also if it applies to all long-spurred flower species.
|
| |
COMMENT 233962
|
2011-11-18 07:15 AM |
|
799 - I agree with you about more people reading Darwin, as he was as good a philosopher and theologian as he was a scientist in many of his writings, and tended to be quite respectful of a variety of views of the world, but Dawkins can be very strident and antagonistic and is hardly a poster child for peace love and understanding amoung people with differing religious views of the world.
|
| |
FLICKA
|
2011-11-18 08:40 AM |
|
Science wins over religion in the creation/evolution discussion. Teach science in schools.
|
| |
COMMENT 234029
|
2011-11-18 09:44 AM |
|
Micro evolution... yes. Good example. But how do you get from there to macro evolution ("new" species being created)? BTW, I challenge you to contemplate the chrysalis stage of a butterfly (where it's former structures are turned to soup and then emerging as a new creature)... might make you change your mind.
|
| |
COMMENT 234105
|
2011-11-18 01:14 PM |
|
234029 The answer to your question has been given numerous times and is well known and well established in biological science. New species are often created when two populations of the same species are isolated from one another ... evolution proceeds separately in both, to the point where they can no longer interbreed, resulting in two different species. There is no limit to the degree of change that can result from a succession of "micro" changes over millions of years ... any such limitation defies logic. And there is nothing about the chysalis stage that is contrary to the theory of evolution; the changes are a result of proteins produced by DNA, and soup is not accurate.
|
| |
COMMENT 234118P
|
2011-11-18 02:31 PM |
|
I'm sure there is order and organization in the pupating chrysalis "soup." Some things are just beyond our understanding, as were the elonging flower parts until now. Kudos to UCSB scientists again!
|
| |
COMMENT 234105
|
2011-11-18 05:50 PM |
|
Google "ENDOCRINE INSIGHTS INTO THE EVOLUTION OF METAMORPHOSIS IN INSECTS" for a scientific explanation of how holometabolism -- the complete metamorphosis seen in pupating insects -- evolved. Argumentum ad ignorantiam (I can't imagine how it could have happened, so it didn't happen) is a fallacious form of thinking. Hard working scientists figure out how our world works ... please don't insult them by suggesting that ignorance and intellectual laziness is an argument.
|
| |
