PaulK
"A bear giving birth to a gorilla - assuming it was entirely natural rather than a gorilla embryo being implanted in a bear - would disprove evolutionary theory."
Crashfrog
"Yes. That would probably disprove evolution. It certainly would require a major new theory if bears regularly gave rise to gorillas."
Lam
"Actually, I think if a bear give birth to some weird creature whose genetic makeup is composed of a completely different genetic language than the bear's, it would totally send all scientists to the nut houses. When I say different genetic language, I'm talking about different types of bases than thymine, cytosine, adenine, and guanine."
So Lam...does that mean...No?
So you disagree with PaulK and Crash, since a Gorilla WOULD carry the same bases. I'm not saying you HAVE to agree with them I just want to highlight it.
Mr.Munroe
I'm a bit confused by your statement and HEY maybe you're a bit confused with mine. It happens
But if you mean to say that I'm changing the subject, then you're right, I did. Ooops, that was not my intention, sorry.
Anyways
I think I can safely say that for all the questions asked the answer would be, nothing would happen. Since God would be the reason for all the occurrences. Which is not too different from Crash's position that if bears gave birth to gorillas, "It certainly would require a major new theory..." Notice, that even IF such a thing did happen and disprove evolution, the idea of a Creator being behind the phenomena would NOT be the first thought or conclusion but rather the idea that a "new" theory is required instead. Which is why I was insinuating that it "wouldn't" disprove evolution.