Bolder-dash writes:
Do you mean like when I asked what a mutation for a tear duct looks like, and he said a mutation to a sebaceous gland, and I asked what change and to which sebaceous gland-just one in the corner of the eye, and he said um, um..nothing?
Is that when he schooled me?
I am so embarrassed to be schooled with such insight blustery.
You should be. You should be embarrassed to even ask such silly questions.
By definition a 'tear duct' would be near an eye, and so yes, it would near an eye.
But there does not even have to be tear ducts. There are many critters that don't have tear ducts.
You still seem to think that there is a goal, that tear ducts are needed and so tear ducts are made.
It don't happen like that.
BUT, what does happen is even neater.
The question you should have asked is "If there was a mutation to a sebaceous gland near an eye that kept the surface wet, would it have given that critter an advantage?"
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!