At 07:51 PM 4/9/2005 -0700, Doug wrote: >>> Oh, and if you looked at the individual data points would evolution go >>> directly from good to better to best? >> >> What is "good" in the context of evolution? > >Poor wording on my part. Measure of success increased linearly, maybe? > >> Isn't the answer to the above: "by definition, yes?" >> >> O.k., maybe you could point to a few exceptions, like say the non-avian >> dinosaurs, but for the most part, I think that the above answer fits.... > >"Evolutionary dead ends are very common in the human fossil record. In >fact, there are people who would claim that we probably don't know any >direct ancestors to Homo sapiens in that record. But if the pattern of >human evolution has been one of the production of new species and the >selective extinction most species in the fossil record, then clearly many, >many species that we know as fossils were evolutionary dead ends in the >sense that they didn't give rise to descendent species." > >Ian Tattersall, Curator in the Department of Anthropology at the American >Museum of Natural History in New York
But on the other hand, those species would never have risen in the first place had they not been evolutionary successful. The fact that other species came along later that were even more successful in no way implies that these species weren't successful in their own right John D. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
