Smoking-Gun Evidence of Man-Monkey Kindred: Episode II... Tails

JohnRay writes:

quote:

---

It would be very strange for two similar species of frog, in the same genus, to have evolved their eyes independently.

---

Why?Vision seems to have independently arisen at least 40 times. What is so surprising about it having developed twice within a major taxonomic branch?You do understand that a genus is not a species, yes?

quote:

---

Or, it would be equally strange for evolution not to evolve the eyes indendently, but while preserving the eye structure and design to change around how it develops and the corresponding genes.

---

Why? If the development of the lens could occur in two ways, why would all members of a taxonomic lineage have to share the same lens morphology?

quote:

---

And this would have to happen quite frequently.

---

Why?I do not see a problem here.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Mr Jack responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Vision seems to have independently arisen at least 40 times. What is so surprising about it having developed twice within a major taxonomic branch?

---

​

But, Rrhain, all amphibian groups have eyes and pretty similar kinds of eyes at that.

---

So? Does the phrase "convergent evolution" mean nothing?

quote:

---

For two frogs within the same genus to have seperately evolved eyes, one would have had, for some unclear reason, have lost it's eyes altogether and then evolved them all over again.

---

Incorrect. While that is one way, it is not the only way. You are assuming that the bifurcation happened after a pathway was selected. Why not before the pathway?Again, a genus is not a species. There is no such thing as a representative organism of a genus. An organism can only exist as a member of a species.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!