Evolution happening before our very eyes? Awesome.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
45,878
8,268
136
The skink can now give birth by either egg or mammalian style. The Skank, however, still gives birth the only way she knows how, in a hospital on your dime 9 months after lying about having used protection,
 

Nik

Lifer
Jun 5, 2006
16,125
2
56
I'm confused. They still lay eggs.

film != egg shell

Additionally, eggs need to gestate and the thing inside doesn't resemble anything more than snot.

Live birth covered in film = already developed, show physical traits that clearly identify it, etc.

The article says one drops eggs quickly where they mature while being watched while the "live birth" version of the animal gestates the "eggs" internally for longer until the egg shell starts to break down. The thing is born looking like its mother, can move under it's own power, etc.
 
Last edited:

HamburgerBoy

Lifer
Apr 12, 2004
27,112
318
126
film != egg shell

Some skinks, they argue, simply retain the egg in the uterus for a longer period of time to protect it from colder external temperatures. The longer the egg is kept in the uterus, the thinner the shell becomes. When a skink is born live, all that remains of the shell is a thin membrane, which the mother helps the baby break open.

:confused:
 

SparkyJJO

Lifer
May 16, 2002
13,357
7
81
I fail to see this as "evolution" - they are still the same species, are they not?

Whatever. :shrug:
 
Aug 8, 2010
1,311
0
0
God working his wonders

No one that I know of has any issue with microevolution. Macroevolution is the issue. When a skink becomes a new species or gives birth to a primate, let me know.

I thought the issue with skinks was that they have been dropping their limbs for the last 3.6 million years.

"According to a 1999 study"..... Wow, this is timely!
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,943
541
126
OHHH, you're just having fun with it. Nevermind my post, then. Heh. :p
And this concludes another demonstration of Poe's Law.

BTW I used that page as my reference because not only does it supply the definition, the rest of the page characterizing Poe's Law is particularly hilarious. :awe:
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,943
541
126
No one that I know of has any issue with microevolution. Macroevolution is the issue. When a skink becomes a new species or gives birth to a primate, let me know.

I thought the issue with skinks was that they have been dropping their limbs for the last 3.6 million years.

SEE!!! :awe:
 

SparkyJJO

Lifer
May 16, 2002
13,357
7
81
Right, because evolution requires an instant change between species. :colbert:

Hey we've been around recording things for thousands of years, surely something would have changed by now, at least some in-between type thing like a lizard with feather quills or something :p
 

Nik

Lifer
Jun 5, 2006
16,125
2
56
And this concludes another demonstration of Poe's Law.

BTW I used that page as my reference because not only does it supply the definition, the rest of the page characterizing Poe's Law is particularly hilarious. :awe:

brilliant.jpg
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
Interesting post. Just because some scientest believes something, it does not mean much. Maybe it is just a different species. Maybe it is evolution, you decide.

Get Tape.
 

Malak

Lifer
Dec 4, 2004
14,696
2
0
An alternative theory:

Maybe some or all creatures that lay eggs always had the ability to keep them inside and only didn't for some reason we will never know.
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,943
541
126
I fail to see this as "evolution" - they are still the same species, are they not?
What is a species?

How do we tell, objectively, one species from another?

For example, how much evolution, or what kind of evolution, would it take to decide that a new species has developed?

Why is the development of novel species the minimally sufficient requirement for demonstration of evolution?

Have you thought about what the answers to these questions are?

Whatever. :shrug:
No, it's not whatever. If you do not understand evolution you have no sound basis upon which to reject it.

Here's some food for thought. All mammals are members of the same class, Mammalia, while also members of the same subphylum Vertebrata, and simultaneously members of the same phylum Chordata, the same superphylum Deuterostoma, and the same kindgom Animalia. All mammals will always be mammals, which means they will always be vertebrates, which means they will always be chordates, deuterostomates, and animals. Regardless, they still managed to evolve into cows, whales, apes, and dogs. Now if nothing stopped the mammals from evolving into that diversity of species, what exactly is stopping this species of skink from evolving into subspecies, and subsubspecies, and subsubsubspecies? Hmm?

You see evolution isn't so much about turning one thing into another, as it is the increasing diversification of biological life within classifications. No vertebrate will ever evolve into an invertebrate, and no mammal will ever evovle into a fish. Evolution does not propose that they will, and in fact would be falsified if they did.
 

Nik

Lifer
Jun 5, 2006
16,125
2
56
Hey we've been around recording things for thousands of years, surely something would have changed by now, at least some in-between type thing like a lizard with feather quills or something :p

Raptors had feathers.
 

Nik

Lifer
Jun 5, 2006
16,125
2
56
An alternative theory:

Maybe some or all creatures that lay eggs always had the ability to keep them inside and only didn't for some reason we will never know.

Evidence to support your theory?
 

Nik

Lifer
Jun 5, 2006
16,125
2
56
Interesting post. Just because some scientest believes something, it does not mean much. Maybe it is just a different species. Maybe it is evolution, you decide.

Get Tape.

Yes, people who have dedicated their professional career to science, discovery, learning, observing, and studying are so stupid that they can't tell the difference between two species and mistake two very obviously different species to be the same species.

I believe you.
 

xSauronx

Lifer
Jul 14, 2000
19,586
4
81
The skinks in colder climates chose to keep their eggs inside to help keep them warm.

so their body hasnt evolved, per se, but they got smarter and have begun to make more rational decisions about when to pop out offspring?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.