IaJ writes:
It means speciation and its adaptation can be safely pointed to an internal factor, which is an immediate one, as opposed external factors such as pre-historic genes and/or environmental impacts.
Ok, so you're saying that genes have nothing to do with speciation? Back to Evolution 101 for you!
And also, acclimitization (an individual animal growing longer fur when it moves to a cold climate) does have little to do with genes. But that is not how speciation or evolution work.
IaJ writes:
a lion does not eat meat
Back to Zoology 101 for you! (although perhaps your double negative has thrown me here)
IaJ writes:
A deformity or talent, for example, may be determined in the dna as a gene factor: but this is also limited to the immediate paranetal genes only - perhaps limited to four generations.
And how, exactly, does a mutation have such a generation limit? What makes it revert once this limit is up? And how does it know what it used to be so that it can revert accurately?
Back to Genetics 101 for you!
Edited by Doddy, : quote tags
Help to inform the public - contribute to the EvoWiki today!
What do you mean "You can't prove a negative"? Have you searched the whole universe for proofs of a negative statement? No? How do you know that they don't exist then?!
™ Version 4.2
