Hi, Barbara.
barbara writes:
One would expect to see some features of dinosaurs left in all of the species we have today.
Organisms can only pass on their features to their offspring.
So, one would have to be the offspring of dinosaurs to have inherited the features of dinosaurs.
-----
barbara writes:
Am I suppose to believe that a small rodent that lived at the time of the dinosaurs was able to radiate every warm blooded species across the globe based on random mutations and isolation for natural selection to change their appearances in every environment.
Well, no. Not a rodent (most mammals did not evolve from rodents). And not just one animal.
But, yes, that’s the basic idea. And, frankly, the math works out rather well, too. Changes happen all the time, and they can accumulate into large differences over rather shorter periods of time than you think.
-----
barbara writes:
The changeover from the large mammals to the one currently living today does make sense in random mutations and natural selection to occur. However it does not explain how the large mammals emerged in the first place.
Size is not really a difficult thing to change via evolution. Even within our one species, we see very tall, very short, very large and very small people. It isn’t really hard to imagine that, over very long periods of time, we could see even greater variation in size due to random chance mutations. In fact, we kind of
are seeing this exact trend in the human population today.
-----
barbara writes:
I think evolution is weak when trying to explain the whole picture of how species evolved into the next.
I humbly submit that this is probably because you do not understand it fully.
Can you give us some real reasons (rather than just disbelief) why you think evolution is a weak explanation?
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.
™ Version 4.2
(1)
