i heard this a long time ago and was intrested in your opinions.aparently thay hav the most advanced sight on earth,shame thay cant remember anything thay see lol :P

i had no idea why either. I did not mean thay can see the longest distance but could see all forms of light .It may have no perpose to them but that does no make it not so.

ok thank you i agree. But are there no animals with abilitys or skills that have no use to them?
im not being obnoxious but some pointless skills and abilitys must have continued being passed down in some animals.

how do you go about testing a goldfish's eyesight anyhow?
i know thay go beserk if you point a laser pen in the tank,but that might just be mine

evolution is incredibly efficient. the best thing about it is its brutality.

please explain to me why i need to shave every morning? if my beard is usless why its progressive? dont tell me its just a coincidence...

so your saying that its still possible for the goldfish to have supireur eyesight ?

there is nothing coincidental about evolution. nothing.

Posted By: MrFingers

my point was that if it serves no purpose then it won't be so.

So... Do you have nipples, sir?

Posted By: MrFingers

there is nothing coincidental about evolution. nothing.

To the contrary... The real beauty of evolution is that absolutely everything about it is coincidental. Creatures don't evolve toward a goal or ideal, they just experience completely random tiny changes in design...

gah, dont be stupid. the mutations are random, but whether or not they result in a species evolution is not.

Posted By: wwbwb9636

Posted By: MrFingers

I was under the impression that eagles had the most advanced sight on earth...

if an animal mutated to have better eye sight, yet he didn't need it to better his chances of survival or reproduction, then his mutation would not be favoured and not ultimately evolve the entire species. since there is no reason a goldfish needs superior eyesight, i do not believe what you say is true.

Wouldn't dumb luck also play a part of this? Say this goldfish mutated to see the entire spectrum, it has no need for it, but nonetheless, it sees "everything." (Kinda like them aliens in the skies... anyway I degress). Now say that this all-seeing goldfish manages to reproduce and pass it's genes on and through some luck generations upon generations of goldfish can see everything. Given the right conditions, this mutation, although not useful, could evolve the entire species, right? The gene, or mutation, as you will, would be ulitmately recessive, thus, slowly, and surely eliminating it from the gene pool. If it is useless, then it must go. Aparently, the tail bone still serves a great purpose, if not great, that meager. I've read it still exists to balance you and is also helps with communication with the brain. Other than that, I can tell you, it tells you not to sit on a bike seat too hard.

Same would go the other way. Suppose this goldfish developed an ability that would promote it's existance like special camouflage that would help it escape from its enemies. Then through dumb luck, it gets squished by a falling baseball that was thrown too hard by a kitten on the moonFirst off, that is completely irrelivent, secondly, ther e is no way for cats to throw baseballs, since they have not evolved aposable thumbs, thirdly, the baseball would burn up in reentry to our atmosphere, and fourthly, it's momentum would surely slow down as soon as it entered the aquatic stage of it's journey. and dies before it gets a chance to reproduce and pass it's genes along. Just cause it's useful doesn't necessarily mean it will get passed along. You over look some of the basics of evolution and "mutation," if you will. Mutation is often quick and induced upon, or because of radiation, and because of this, it is very unstable, often leading in an unstable and harmful, well, mutation. Which brings me to my next point, mutation is not something that is well known to our species, therefore we cannot predict of pretend to predict that "gamma rays," for example, will produce our little friend, James (I believe) banner (or tanner?) into the big hulk-like green creature, we know as the hulk. Also, if you take evolution into consideration, then, well, acording to dawrin's theory, then all evolutionary measures have purpose, so the goldfish will not devolope cammoflouge (spelling, right?) without the intent of protecting it's self. Thus, this evolution takiong many eaons (spelling again??) and being very slowly and surely implimented into it's genetic code for future generations.

Just meandering." alt="" src="/extensions/Vanillacons/smilies/standard/wink.gif">

P.S. Don't forget that there are many examples of evolution that have occured on multiple species that have no contact with eachother. Oddly enough, this is not too uncommon.

Posted By: MrFingers

the mutations are random, but whether or not they result in a species evolution is not.

isnt it exacly the same what i said?

Posted By: migrena

its totally random but the scale makes it stastical and therfore there is some general direction

Posted By: MrFingers

no, it's not the scale of the mutations, it's the success. there is nothing random about what succeeds. it doesnt matter if there are 100 or 1 million different mutations of an animal's eye, the only one that will remain is the most successful.

Not really.

It's more like this:
If it negatively affects the model's survival, then model will not reproduce and therefore, the mutation will die out.
If it positively affects the model's survival, then model will reproduce and the mutation will survive and perhaps become dominant.
If it does not affect the model's survival, then it will survive. Consider blue, green, brown and hazel eyes: brown eyes are dominant, but the others continue to survive because they neither endanger a person's life nor give that person a survival advantage over others.

I said "survival advantage." At this point in human evolution, I'm not sure our survival depends on vision in dim light.

but it is an advantage nonetheless. just like fairer skin allows more vitamin D creation. (is it D or A that requires sun light?)

if say there is a mutation that produces no effects at all. there is a population of 100 of that species and 1 of them mutates with this entirely useless mutation. his mutation will be diluted fairly rapidly as generations pass. now whether that mutation is dominant or recessive is a different matter... actually I don't really know where I'm going with this.

anyway the point is, i can't think of a mutation that would have absolutely no effect, much less spread across the entire species.

You know... one day x-ray vision goldfish will rule the world. Should make peace with them.

So that is the purpose of that evolution!

There is randomness to the mutations, but nothing is random about what develops into a full species evolution.