https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakicetus

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46537670)

This chart isn't real fuckin helpful either. I see a lot of missing links.

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/what-are-evograms/the-evolution-of-whales/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539190)

https://www.quantamagazine.org/evolution-runs-faster-on-short-timescales-20170314/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540982)

That there'll be nobody there

If you feel excited throw your hands into the air

No one can judge you baby

That don't live your life

I need the resistance

Held by your astrological sign

Now I'm caught in the middle

You're next to me

I swim with the fishes

You come from the sea

The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539198)

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2326717-dogs-are-descended-from-two-populations-of-ancient-wolves/

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/dogs-may-have-evolved-from-two-different-wolf-populations-180980350/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539395)

this link has it at 9-34k: https://www.livescience.com/50928-wolf-genome-dog-ancient-ancestor.html

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539619)

They are also both shitty examples because both can still mate with the wild population just fine. There's nothing at all preventing a dog and wolf from mating or even living in the same pack. They probably don't recognize each other as different species at all.

Furthermore, both dogs and cats can go feral and be just fine. They don't need humans, they just form packs like their wolf cousins and act more or less like wolves. Pigs, horses and sheep can do this too.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539885)

15,000 years from wolves to those variations.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539410)

let me know when one of them sprouts wings and starts flying, macro-e cuck

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46541081)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539415)

My point is macro is just micro on a longer timescale

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539426)

https://theconversation.com/humans-are-8-virus-how-the-ancient-viral-dna-in-your-genome-plays-a-role-in-human-disease-and-development-192322

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540543)

that's why the jew sophist stephen jay gould came up with "punctuated equilibrium."

but pe is not a "theory"--it is just a straightforward statement of the empirical evidence that macroevolution doesn't exist. that's why it's "punctuated"--because the intermediate fossils required by evolutionary theory simply don't exist.

evolution is not just a falsifiable theory; it's a theory that already has been falsified by the actual fossil record.

because it never happened. sure, poodles aren't wolves. but poodles don't fly either, do they? and they don't live in the ocean, do they?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46541963)

how much have wolves "evolved" since they split? Probably zero.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539954)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Canis_dirus_skull_and_neck.jpg/1920px-Canis_dirus_skull_and_neck.jpg

What happened is that some wolves adapted to humans, and those wolves now greatly outnumber every other type of wolf by exponential factors. The total number of "dogs" on earth must be 100 trillion times the number of all wolves combined.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539971)

Here are a few key pieces of evidence:

Fossil Records: Fossils provide direct evidence of macroevolution through the emergence of new species, new groups of species, and the extinction of species over geologic time. For example, we have a well-documented fossil record showing the transition from fish to amphibians, from land-dwelling mammals to whales, and from non-avian dinosaurs to birds.

Comparative Anatomy and Embryology: Organisms that have a common ancestor often share similar structures, even if they serve different functions. For instance, the limb structures of humans, bats, cats, and whales are strikingly similar, indicating a common ancestral origin. Embryonic similarities between different species also suggest common ancestry and macroevolutionary change.

Molecular Evidence: All life shares the same basic biochemistry, such as DNA, RNA, and proteins. Genetic comparisons (comparing DNA sequences) among diverse forms of life reveal the degree of relatedness among different organisms and are used to construct phylogenetic trees. For example, humans and chimpanzees share about 98.7% of their genetic material, pointing to a relatively recent common ancestor.

Biogeography: The geographic distribution of species on Earth is consistent with macroevolutionary theory. This can be seen in the distinct but related species found on different continents, on islands, and in isolated environments. For instance, the distribution and diversification of Darwin's finches across the Galapagos Islands is a well-known example of macroevolution.

Direct Observation: In some cases, macroevolution has been directly observed. This is especially true for organisms with short generation times, such as certain species of plants, insects, and microorganisms. For instance, the evolution of antibiotic resistance in bacteria is a form of macroevolution.

All these different lines of evidence converge to the same conclusion, providing a powerful testament to the reality of macroevolution.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539435)

just walk on the same side of the road as this pack of teen niggers, nothing is gonna happen

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539463)

this guy in drag is a woman and if you say otherwise then you will lose your livelihood

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539501)

Are you scared of dying if an asteroid hits the other side of the earth too?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539611)

I provided several ways we can discern its realness, including the genetic data. You’re just an emotional idiot.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539558)

You are also missing DNA beyond a certain point in time. The fossil record goes back exponentially further than the length of time we can expect viable DNA to survive.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539833)

Or alternatively, that's just how they are. They are both igneous rocks. Humans and monkeys are both mammals.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540155)

Biological evolution is primarily driven by genetic variation and natural selection. Genes mutate, creating variation on which natural selection can act. Beneficial traits become more common over generations, leading to adaptation and speciation. Rocks, being inorganic, don't have genes and can't pass traits to offspring, so they cannot evolve in the way organisms do.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540458)

I explained why your comparison is retarded

You responded with more gibberish in reply to something I didn’t say

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540534)

Darwin's Finches: The finches on the Galapagos Islands are one of the most famous examples of observed speciation. The Grants, a pair of evolutionary biologists, have been studying these birds for over 40 years and have documented the development of a new species in real time.

Hawthorn Fly (Rhagoletis pomonella): This insect originally laid its eggs only in the fruit of the hawthorn tree, but some flies started laying their eggs in introduced apple trees in the 1800s. The two fly populations – those that lay their eggs in apple trees and those that lay their eggs in hawthorn trees – have since become so genetically distinct that they are on the path to becoming two different species.

London Underground Mosquito (Culex pipiens): During World War II, mosquitoes in the London Underground train system evolved to become a separate species (Culex pipiens molestus) from their above-ground counterparts (Culex pipiens pipiens). The underground mosquitoes do not require a blood meal before laying eggs and breed all year round, which the above-ground mosquitoes do not.

Peppered Moths (Biston betularia): This is an example of rapid natural selection rather than speciation, but it's quite instructive. Prior to the Industrial Revolution in England, the light-colored form of this moth was common. As soot blackened the trees of the forests, the dark form of the moth became more common because it was better camouflaged from predators.

Cichlid Fish in Lake Victoria: These fish are an impressive example of adaptive radiation, where multiple species evolve from a single ancestral species. Over the past 15,000 years, a single species of cichlid fish introduced into Lake Victoria has diversified into more than 500 species.

Three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus): This is a fish species that, after the last Ice Age, has shown numerous instances of speciation as populations adapted to freshwater environments distinct from their ancestral marine habitats.

These examples demonstrate that speciation is a process that can and does happen within observable timescales.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540447)

https://theconversation.com/humans-are-8-virus-how-the-ancient-viral-dna-in-your-genome-plays-a-role-in-human-disease-and-development-192322

We also have a lot of genetic "slack." Like 80% of our DNA isn't being used. However if you bioengineered someone to have only the 20% that seems useful they would die. The slack is doing *something* in every one of us.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540528)

I responded by referring you to the work of biologists to determine what criteria they use when analyzing what consititutes speciation.

You response was to accuse me of “equivocating”.

I responded by, again, referring you to the work of biologists in the field. Not my own personal opinion of what speciation is, which literally doesn’t matter because (1) I’m not a biologist; and (2) even if I were, my opinion may be idiosyncratic and not representative of scientific consensus

Your response was to say the same thing again, like some kind of retarded robot

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540618)

lol jk honey ur beautiful just as u are

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539621)

https://thewhiskerchronicles.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/bear-phylogenetic-tree.jpg

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46539771)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540599)

https://www.bionity.com/en/encyclopedia/Timeline_of_evolution.html#:~:text=Basic%20timeline,-The%20basic%20timeline&text=2%20billion%20years%20of%20complex,of%20insects%2C%20arachnids%20and%20crustaceans)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540667)

https://www.quantamagazine.org/evolution-runs-faster-on-short-timescales-20170314/

God damn look at how smug and certain libs were when they told us we could scale up from microevolutionary timescales. What LOSERS these people are. Extremely dumb people.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540755)

It also means that scientists may need to revise the dates of evolutionary events in the deep past, as they likely underestimated how long ago they truly happened, Katzourakis said.

It also means that scientists may need to revise the dates of evolutionary events in the deep past, as they likely underestimated how long ago they truly happened, Katzourakis said.

It also means that scientists may need to revise the dates of evolutionary events in the deep past, as they likely underestimated how long ago they truly happened, Katzourakis said.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46540769)

https://d2r55xnwy6nx47.cloudfront.net/uploads/2017/03/Evol615.gif

There are likely ancestral sequences hidden in that slack that exist species-wide in a kind of quantum state. They can get triggered with some frequency after remaining largely dormant for millions of years. You see it as "microevolution," but on a long enough timescale it's just a blip. Any major transformation occurs over such a long timescale that you're unlikely to witness any observable step along the path even on 100k year timescales. That's true even if it takes place in the span of 1000 years. Just as a matter of random chance, it's unlikely that 1000 year timeframe is going to occur within the last 15k years or even 500k years, given a 50-500 million year timespan.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#46541171)

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.dgrPsS-GRzCsA_mT2D_5DwHaE5%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=ba2db1e450970a4feeb8dbb6957575aeb84bf78fd00ed8c8905bbf055389c796&ipo=images&anon_safari_group=21

And here’s one without the pigment:

https://static.mothership.sg/1/2019/12/gorilla-hand-look-like-human.jpg

There’s nothing more familiar to you than your own hand. Even if they continue to deny it out loud they can’t deny it to themselves.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5371492&forum_id=2...id.#47721874)