That's quite a leap. I am always interested to see this line of reasoning suggested in the findings of biological studies: Animals evolved Trait X in order to achieve Goal Y.
I don't believe it, and neither (I don't think) do biologists. So why are we always implying upward mobility and goal orientation explains evidence of natural selection?
I am not a scientist. But I did sort-of act like one for several years after college. And I think I can offer a better explanation for the lengthening of toad's legs: (A) Leg length varies in populations of mobile toads; (b) longer legs=faster toads; which explains (C) toads with longer legs arrived in new territory first; therefore (D) longer-legged toads bred with each other first and produced (as like begets like) a higher percentage of longer-legged toads in said new territory.
Funny thing is that when quoted, the biologists don't speculate beyond their evidence:
"We find that toads with longer legs can not only move faster and are the first to arrive in new areas, but also that those at the front have longer legs than toads in older populations," Shine said in a report in the journal Nature.
The researchers studied toads leading the invasion about 60 km (37 miles) east of the northern city of Darwin. They discovered that the first toads to arrive in new areas had longer hind legs than those that came later.
But as soon as the reporter attempts to sum this up for us, we get more Yuppie Toad Theory: "The scientists believe the toads evolved longer legs to conquer new territory to get to better food supplies."
That's some damn fine toad thinking, not to mention advanced toad Eugenics!
1 comment:
A person in charge of teaching my son told the class that giraffes developed long necks to reach the treetops. I told my kids that if it was that easy I'd be 6ft tall and able to reach the top shelf.
I'm no scientist either. Obviously!
Post a Comment