Its oh so quiet Shh Shh

[RedSidedSPR]

After that amusing 3 pages, I forgot what I came here for

[ConcinusMan]

Perfect. My work is done.

[Stefan-A]

Perfect. My work is done.

It's not done by a long shot. You still have a lot of questions to answer.

[ConcinusMan]

I think that you're probably a better source for answers. I'm just a guy on the internet.

A couple of things I was hoping you would be able answer:

Why the hell wouldn't they remain wolves and shrews?

Why the hell didn't the first mammals just remain as they were?

The genetic evidence is more than enough to demonstrate that it happened and it's not going to happen again

How can the theory say that evolution into new lines happened, while simultaneously predicting that it won't happen again? Why can't a wolf be the ancestor of future mammals that are not wolves? Isn't that what happened already? The ancestor of wolves, rodents, primates, human beings, is a common one is it not? They say the first mammals were tiny shrew-like animals. If they can't evolve into anything else, then where did the rest of the mammals come from? I'm confused because it sounds like you're saying that a shrew can't evolve into something that isn't a shrew, but that it did happen already.

[Stefan-A]

Why the hell didn't the first mammals just remain as they were?

The question is nonsensical. There were no "first mammals". Gradual changes render the term "first" meaningless.

How can the theory say that evolution into new lines happened, while simultaneously predicting that it won't happen again?

They're not new lines, the line simply split.

Why can't a wolf be the ancestor of future mammals that are not wolves?

Because they'd still be a subset of wolf, no matter how different they'd become compared to whatever species they split from. You are nothing like the "first" mammals, but I bet you'd still consider yourself a mammal. The same thing applies to taxonomic ranks above and below class.

Isn't that what happened already? The ancestor of wolves, rodents, primates, human beings, is a common one is it not?

See previous answer.

They say the first mammals were tiny shrew-like animals.

Shrew-like is not shrew.

If they can't evolve into anything else, then where did the rest of the mammals come from?

You really don't get the splitting thing.

I'm confused because it sounds like you're saying that a shrew can't evolve into something that isn't a shrew, but that it did happen already.

See previous answers. Also, it didn't happen.

Do you always answer questions with questions?

[ConcinusMan]

The question is nonsensical. There were no "first mammals". Gradual changes render the term "first" meaningless.

I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the first mammals to appear in the fossil record.

You really don't get the splitting thing.

Apparently not, but I'm trying.

Do you always answer questions with questions?

I wasn't trying to answer any questions. What were the questions again?

[Stefan-A]

I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the first mammals to appear in the fossil record.

You thought wrong and it makes no difference.

Apparently not, but I'm trying.

I doubt it.

I drew a picture for you, but I deleted it.

I wasn't trying to answer any questions.

Well there's your problem.

What were the questions again?

Go back to the beginning and start searching for question marks. If they appear in my posts, chances are that the questions they were attached to were never answered.

[ConcinusMan]

Go back to the beginning and start searching for question marks. If they appear in my posts, chances are that the questions they were attached to were never answered.

After all the physical changes and tens of thousands of years, (even longer) a dog is still a wolf.

What the hell else would it be?

A different wolf, I suppose. Wait...



You win. I'm an idiot.

I get it now. I wouldn't expect a wolf to to evolve into something other than a wolf unless I would also expect a mammal to evolve into anything but another mammal. Why didn't you just say that. Geez.

Wait, doesn't that make every living thing on earth today just a subset of prokaryote?

[Stefan-A]

You win. I'm an idiot.

Nice try, but I'm not in it to "win" anything.

[ConcinusMan]

Nice try, but I'm not in it to "win" anything.

Sure you were. You were trying to convince me that I am wrong about evolution not being observed. You did that.

The question is nonsensical. There were no "first mammals".

What about first living things? What were they? If the question is nonsensical then so is the existence of life. There were no "first" life forms? Life doesn't exist. It's all an illusion. Everything we "know" is a lie. OMG! Next thing you know, a snake will disappear by swallowing itself and people will be dividing by zero. It will be chaos!