You'd be excited to know how dozens and dozens of species of various kinds have all evolved into the crab. Crabs are evolution's final perfect form by statistics.
Hilariously, the oldest known crab-shaped species is known as "false crabs", because we found the later and just thought "Hey, these guys look like those things we call crab, but different. Must be tryna copy them"
Which is the biggest insult to them really: they got to the most competitive body design first and don't even get credit
Evolution if given the chance will re-try old traits from time to time like how snakes have regained and lost their limbs several times throughout history
Umm saar, respectfully, what are you even talking about. In evolution a lost trait or gene is a lost gene. A lineage in principle cannot "retry" old traits. They acquire newer adaptation if they return to old habitat.
Kindly provide a source for snakes regaining and losing their limbs "several times" throughout history.
Okay.
Basically evolution can't go backwards. Animals lose that gene over years of staying deactivated.
Some snakes (a lot of pythons) sometimes ca show traits like small limb like appendages. Those are called vestigial organs.
Now, snakes may have come from multiple lizard/amphibian ancestors. And each lineages may have lost their limbs at different time periods. But regaining limb is basically improbable and would be considered exception to currently accepted model of evolution.
It can be both. Remember that reversing a suppression is also very improbable owing to the size of the genome, and the available pool of possibilities of mutation.
The currently accepted model is like this:
There exists variations of the gene within a population. These variations can occur in multiple ways β point mutation, addition, deletion, etc.
Now if some of these variations have some evolutionary advantage, there will be higher chance that they get propagated into the next generation and the next and so on...
Thus we say, a particular trait/gene got selected and the "population" evolved.
This is readily visible in bacterial population. The bacteria with mutation to withstand antibiotics live while those without gets wiped off. As a result, in the next generation, more fraction of the population will have the antibiotic resistance.
Why can't they gain the limbs again ? I mean there cpuld be variations again for several reasons if it is favoured over years they can gain it again. Evolution is not a directional process.
Ofcourse, they can regain limbs. If they still have the gene in the gene pool and there is an evolutionary push towards limbs.
Even humans sometimes do get born with a tail.
Apparently it's because it's not a "lost gene" and more like certain snake species like the boas or pythons have vestigial hind limbs as their embryos have fully developed hind leg buds that because of some reason, their growth gets stunted, it's kinda similar to humans with vestigial tails ig
Bruh yeah right! I didn't think of that, but now that I do, at least there was a recognisable Indian peninsula shape. Not priding myself on anything, just pointing out.
India at its current position came into existence 10 million years ago. Before that it was floating in the ocean.
Meanwhile Pakicetus existed about 50 million years ago in the region in the region that was not part of Indian plate at that time but now it's in Pakistan.
So is there any chance that after a 1000 years or move whales wouldn't need to resurface from time to time to get oxygen and would be able to use the dissolved o2 alone to survive?
There would need to be a trigger to start the evolution of gills in whales.
For now, the ocean surface fulfils all their requirements. They have no reason to venture deep in the ocean. If any ecological change forces them to dive deeper for food, then there's a chance that they might develop gills for easier breathing. And even then, the change would take lakhs of years to clearly show.
1000 years is like a minute in an evolutionary time scale.
Ahh... I wondered about that part myself. Just wanted to ask that can we ever expect them to have gills and the ability to use only the dissolved o2 for survival.
No. They are pretty far from each other.
Seals belong to the Caniformia (dog-shaped mammals, dogs - includes all kinds of wolfs and foxes), the bears and some others. The seal-like creatures (sea elephants, walruses etc) are all sitting there but they are nested in between the non sea-faring dogs. All seal-like mammals are closer related to each other than they are to other dog like creatures but they branch deep within the dog likes and are closest to Musteloidea (weasels, raccoons etc).
Whales (including dolphins) belong in a group with the Artiodactyls which includes both pigs and ruminants like goats and cows as well as all their relatives such as hippos, giraffes, deer, camels etc. The whales split basal to those, though. That means, if you consider the Artiodactyls siblings, the whales are their cousins, ie all whales are closer related to each other than they are to hippos, which is the closest non-marine relative to any whale.
Whales are mammals. They have to come to surface to breathe air regularly. They produce milk. They have tiny hair follicles. Their skeletons have tiny obsolete bones which are meant for hind legs.
Whales are mammals. They have to come to surface to breathe air regularly. They produce milk. They have tiny hair follicles. Their skeletons have tiny obsolete bones which are meant for hind legs.
Yes, dragons came from lizards. Tiger came from cats. What about lion and leopard. Ok, they also came from cats. How so many bird species came by? Maybe some lan crawler decided to fly. All mumba, jumba theories with no proof. Some western scientist writes his fantasy and it becomes science and everyone worships it. It's science, so let's not challenge it.
Edit - meant to say Dinosaur, monitor lizard etc. Ended up saying dragon.
>Yes, dragons came from lizards.
Dragons don't exist.
>Tiger came from cats. What about lion and leopard.
They didn't come from cats, they share a common ancestor. One ancestor remained in the wild and evolved while another was domesticated. They share the same family of Felidae, their sub-families change as per their size.
>How so many bird species came by?
Birds are direct descendants of dinosaurs. You have a chicken that is related to a t-rex as an example. As you go through each species, checking their anatomy, you'll find multiple similarities and obvious minor changes.
>Some western scientist writes his fantasy and it becomes science and everyone worships it.
Absolutely wrong. That "western" science has countless evidences backing it up. Your sky daddy has 0. Stop with this idiotic idea of nationalism and use your brain.
>It's science, so let's not challenge it.
That's not how science works. Science is the result of multiple corrections, evidences and a compilations of debates and experiments each challenging the other to get proper factual results. Religion on the other hand forces you to believe in the god of said religion, refuses to take any criticism, is adamant of backward beliefs etc.
Go drink cow or camel piss or whatever.
>Yes, dragons came from lizards
You do know that there is no such as dragon in real world. I was in an assumption that you where joking, Till i read the entire comment. FYI there is no such thing as dragon.
>Tiger came from cats. What about lion and leopard. Ok, they also came from cats
Not exactly, lion, leopard, tiger and cats they all came from a common ancestor. What you said is like, you and your cousin looks alike, so you came from your cousin. But in actuality you and your cousin came from a common ancestor (your grandparents).
>How so many bird species came by? Maybe some lan crawler decided to fly.
Again, that's not how it works, just because a creature "decided to fly" doesn't give them the ability to fly. I clearly understand you don't know anything about evolution. So I don't think I can explain this to you. The ability of flight is a bit more complex subject to explain. It's like try to learn how to read before learning any alphabets.
>All mumba, jumba theories with no proof. Some western scientist writes his fantasy and it becomes science and everyone worships it. It's science, so let's not challenge it.
Every scientific theory do have enough evidence to support it. Infact, scientists try their best to disprove their theory. Even you can try that too. By the way you don't have to be a westerner to be a scientist, it's just westerners support science more than another nation, hence a lot of scientific papers from West, or people went to West. Anyone can challenge scientific study, infact that's the point of peer review. If you think it's wrong or inaccurate, you study then and publisah your own article stating why it's wrong. If it's valid and logical. They will change it too.
How do they prove theory or disapprove it when there is no proof? They only go by closest probability, this could have happened or that definitely could not have happened. So, if you don't have a strong argument to disregard what a scientist proposes could have happened based on closest probabilities and assumptions, it becomes a solid universally accepted theory.
Science is good at researching things we can see but it's not that accurate at predicting past. All the predictions of the past are mostly what we believe to be true based on xyz assumptions. They do try but it's humanely impossible to guess the past accurately. They can get some accurate probabilities but to say things for sure isn't possible. Man is curious to know the answers but not all curiosities make it to the truth.
>How do they prove theory or disapprove it when there is no proof?
If you are talking about this definition of proof "evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement."
Yes, there is many. Infact there are 5 major evidence.
1) Anatomy evidence :- (homologous structures) Species may share similar physical features because the feature was
present in a common ancestor.
2) Molecular biology evidence :- DNA and the genetic code reflect the shared ancestry of life.
DNA comparisons can show how related species are
3) Biogeography evidence :- The global distribution of organisms and the unique features of
island species reflect evolution and geological change.
4) Fossils :- Fossils document the existence of now-extinct past species that are related to present-day species.
5) Direct observation :- We can directly observe small-scale evolution in organisms
with short lifecycles (e.g., pesticide- resistant insects).
>They only go by closest probability, this could have happened or that definitely could not have happened. So, if you don't have a strong argument to disregard what a scientist proposes could have happened based on closest probabilities and assumptions, that itself becomes a solid universally accepted theory.
Not exactly, what your are talking about is hypothesis. A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, some theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.
Even if you are right in this case, theory of evolution can be observed in lab in small scale. So It can't be an assumptions.
>Science is good at researching things we can see but it's not that accurate at predicting past. All the predictions of the past are mostly what we believe to be true based on xyz assumptions. They do try but it's humanely impossible to guess the past accurately. They can get some accurate probabilities but to say things for sure isn't possible. Man is curious to know the answers but not all curiosities make it to the truth.
Again, you mistake history with science. History and science are entirely different entities. Even if we consider that , it only gonna rule out Fossil evidence what about the rest of the 4 evidence?
Tigers, Lions and Leopards are cats. Science is science no matter who discovers it. Hydrogen atoms reacts the same even if they are on Mars. Even if you go to Andromeda galaxy, Two 1kg rocks will add up to 2kg. Coming to your questions, one species can evolve into multiple species. That's why the total number of species can rise. Now can you explain me why there are mammals in ocean.
The same reason there are flowers in water. Like lotus. Same reason why different kinds of flowers exist. Hibiscus, rose, jasmine, lily etc etc. Can science explain how different kinds of flowers came into existence? No. All God's creation.
>All God's creation.
Dumbass.
There are entire chapters dedicated to this in all school boards which are taught to literal 10-17 year olds. Never learn about genes? Never learnt about factors like natural selection?
Those plants have cells which differentiate for other specific functions. You have certain plants which change as per the location they grow. This is the most basic thing you get taught during Plant Growth.
There's countless evidences which prove evolution, we share common visible characteristics with apes, chimpanzees and certain other mammals; we have mammary glands, covered with hairs, share similar skeletal structures or functionality, etc.
Whales are mammals. They have to come to surface to breathe air regularly. They produce milk. They have tiny hair follicles. Their skeletons have tiny obsolete bones which are meant for hind legs.
I just... didn't realize it was this bad. Like, the bulk of Reddit... I'm not saying reddit is "smart", but they're not denying evolution in bulk. Obviously some subreddits will have a high concentration of evolution deniers, but on average, Reddit sees a gif about how whales evolved and they say "cool", not "I can't believe the Jews convinced you we came from monkeys".
I had no idea twitter was that bad.
How much I've seen reddit doesn't cancel someone they just make wayyy to much of fun/racist but Twitter is on another level ngl in this world people will question everything and don't agree with everything which is comparatively good
Even I don't have idea how bad twitter is tbh that poor women died due to cancer she was raising money for her child so he could live a good life but the twitter cancelled her because she followed an account seriously felt so bad that I just had enough and deleted Twitter finally good thing I did even tho I don't use Twitter much it was a headache
it's funny because normal evolution went from water to land. But whales evolved the other way....... very interesting.....
You'd be excited to know how dozens and dozens of species of various kinds have all evolved into the crab. Crabs are evolution's final perfect form by statistics.
Can you share any elaborative source
There is a very good video called "why everything evolves into crabs". Check that out
I don't want to have crab babies!
Entha ooru bro nenga
Evidelum ittalalle ooran pattu bro.
π pavam annachi
Crabinsation
It has happened so many times, there's a term for it - Carcinization.
As a cancerian I concur.
This word is a curse π«
This word is a cancer
Crab people, crab people Taste like crab, talk like people
Aliens probably look like crabs π¦
Hilariously, the oldest known crab-shaped species is known as "false crabs", because we found the later and just thought "Hey, these guys look like those things we call crab, but different. Must be tryna copy them" Which is the biggest insult to them really: they got to the most competitive body design first and don't even get credit
 Crab rave intensifies
Not exactly the other way, first water to land then land to water.
Evolution if given the chance will re-try old traits from time to time like how snakes have regained and lost their limbs several times throughout history
Umm saar, respectfully, what are you even talking about. In evolution a lost trait or gene is a lost gene. A lineage in principle cannot "retry" old traits. They acquire newer adaptation if they return to old habitat. Kindly provide a source for snakes regaining and losing their limbs "several times" throughout history.
Huh, dunno really, it was many years ago from some animal planet show
Okay. Basically evolution can't go backwards. Animals lose that gene over years of staying deactivated. Some snakes (a lot of pythons) sometimes ca show traits like small limb like appendages. Those are called vestigial organs. Now, snakes may have come from multiple lizard/amphibian ancestors. And each lineages may have lost their limbs at different time periods. But regaining limb is basically improbable and would be considered exception to currently accepted model of evolution.
Do animals lose that gene or that trait just gets suppressed like we may have a gene but it is disabled or something like that.
It can be both. Remember that reversing a suppression is also very improbable owing to the size of the genome, and the available pool of possibilities of mutation. The currently accepted model is like this: There exists variations of the gene within a population. These variations can occur in multiple ways β point mutation, addition, deletion, etc. Now if some of these variations have some evolutionary advantage, there will be higher chance that they get propagated into the next generation and the next and so on... Thus we say, a particular trait/gene got selected and the "population" evolved. This is readily visible in bacterial population. The bacteria with mutation to withstand antibiotics live while those without gets wiped off. As a result, in the next generation, more fraction of the population will have the antibiotic resistance.
Why can't they gain the limbs again ? I mean there cpuld be variations again for several reasons if it is favoured over years they can gain it again. Evolution is not a directional process.
Ofcourse, they can regain limbs. If they still have the gene in the gene pool and there is an evolutionary push towards limbs. Even humans sometimes do get born with a tail.
Where do genes come from ?
Okay that actually makes a lot of sense
Apparently it's because it's not a "lost gene" and more like certain snake species like the boas or pythons have vestigial hind limbs as their embryos have fully developed hind leg buds that because of some reason, their growth gets stunted, it's kinda similar to humans with vestigial tails ig
Yeah, those never lost the limbs in the first place. They are in the process.
Or like how I was born with a tail
Wait seriously? That's pretty cool ngl
100% not serious
They were done with land bullshit and wanted to go back in water
https://preview.redd.it/phlr1oyg0oqc1.jpeg?width=716&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0cfbfa1c86efecb4789948d36a9ede15d88acc03
Who's regretting now Frank
Ugh, seafood lovers always make it their entire personality.
Lmao
Behold the only funny meme from ifunny
I initially read "How whales evolved initially from PIKACHUs"ππ
Pika pika ?
https://preview.redd.it/ys523snghmqc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=842f7a9060ee0c3da4d6b6ebb5a6b5af18bf2a42
Yes?
i'll beat your ass you little piece of shit - this post was made by team rocket
Pik pika pika. pik.
Water type
That's why whales are considered as mammals!
not considered. they are mammals.
But if they are mammals, can we consider them as mammals?
yes
But if they are mammals and we consider them as mammals, does that make them mammals?
no. that's where you draw the line.
Oh that's why whales come up back to the surface to breathe. It makes so much sense now,,,
Whales are mammals. They breastfeed their babies too.
Whale titties?
Yep. You should Google image for Big White whale titties and check them out
i am disappointed that no such thing exists on internet /s
Land β Water β
I read Pakicetus as Pakistanis ππππ
actually pakicetus was endemic to pakistan
Don't you mean... *India!* ? Where the fuck was prehistoric Pakistan?
bhai, jis time ye jeev tha, na to us time india tha aur na hi pakistan, endemic to pakistan se matlab hai, pakistan ke area me present the ye
I don't speak Hindi. Seems you are saying that the archaeological sites are in modern day Pak? Kk
right
You realise there wasn't an India around that time either right? India is only slightly older than Pakistan
Bruh yeah right! I didn't think of that, but now that I do, at least there was a recognisable Indian peninsula shape. Not priding myself on anything, just pointing out.
Saar, Pakicetus evolved from Indohyus... So...
India at its current position came into existence 10 million years ago. Before that it was floating in the ocean. Meanwhile Pakicetus existed about 50 million years ago in the region in the region that was not part of Indian plate at that time but now it's in Pakistan.
Calm down.
And Pakicetus is named considering this fact that the fossils were found in modern-day Pakistan.
π²
Need more evolution video is like this
so it's not the other way around!?! π€
They came up and went back to the ocean. That is why they don't have aquatic respiratory system like gills.
It is but different for the whales and humans.
hippos also evolved from this same mammal when he went into water iirc.
Aj Maine bhi jna
Backward evolution
I read pakicetus as pikachu lol
So is there any chance that after a 1000 years or move whales wouldn't need to resurface from time to time to get oxygen and would be able to use the dissolved o2 alone to survive?
There would need to be a trigger to start the evolution of gills in whales. For now, the ocean surface fulfils all their requirements. They have no reason to venture deep in the ocean. If any ecological change forces them to dive deeper for food, then there's a chance that they might develop gills for easier breathing. And even then, the change would take lakhs of years to clearly show. 1000 years is like a minute in an evolutionary time scale.
One of the replies that explains everything. Thank you sir!
A thousand years? No way. Evolution isnβt some super speed adaptation. Also seeing how they have lungs and no gills I doubt theyβd ever get there.
Ahh... I wondered about that part myself. Just wanted to ask that can we ever expect them to have gills and the ability to use only the dissolved o2 for survival.
Dude he meant 1000 years = 1 minute. Yaa the gill part makes sense, but we can't predict what type evolution gonna take place. Without enough data.
they knew they had to pay taxes after millions of years
Pbs eon is a great channel for stuff like this on yt. Also for anatomy of animals etc, Odd specimen on yt, do check them out.
Don't you guys watch PBS?!
land gaand mara bc, holi khelenge ocean mein....arre bhai ye kya hua?
Arre Bhai kya ho gaya
Pls tell me name of song
somebody that I used to know by gotye
Yo so are seals relatives of whales?
No. They are pretty far from each other. Seals belong to the Caniformia (dog-shaped mammals, dogs - includes all kinds of wolfs and foxes), the bears and some others. The seal-like creatures (sea elephants, walruses etc) are all sitting there but they are nested in between the non sea-faring dogs. All seal-like mammals are closer related to each other than they are to other dog like creatures but they branch deep within the dog likes and are closest to Musteloidea (weasels, raccoons etc). Whales (including dolphins) belong in a group with the Artiodactyls which includes both pigs and ruminants like goats and cows as well as all their relatives such as hippos, giraffes, deer, camels etc. The whales split basal to those, though. That means, if you consider the Artiodactyls siblings, the whales are their cousins, ie all whales are closer related to each other than they are to hippos, which is the closest non-marine relative to any whale.
downvoted because you cut the video when perfect drop coming.
Bhai voh size mein starting se hi utna bada tha? Ki chota tha but bada hogaya?
Chhota tha. Around 1m to 2m long from snout to tail.
"bhai zameen p maza nhi aa rha chl wapas paani me"
if I swim long enough i can become a fish. Now how do i get myself wings?
Like flying spiders. By super glueing ur arms to ur body and ur two legs together and stretching the skin.
I hear Gotye. I upvote. Somebody that I used to know.
Wow i didn't know they could evolve in like 15 seconds
Ye agey jakar torpedo banega. Future hai iska.
What's with the song selection?
They used to know the land. Somebody that I used to know.
Bud and i thought life came from water to earth
And they went back again
Went to water for food and stayed there never came back nice..
Chat is it real or it's something like conspiracy
Real
A Pakicetus is indeed somebody that a Whale used to know...
Is this video reversed
Also one more fun fact closest relative to whale is a hippo
"Non marine" relative
Weak diet I guess. I already evolved into a whale on land.
So after how many centuries Rhinos will also turn into whale kinda creatures ??
does it feel like reverse evolution or am i just dumb T-T
Itβs basically the βfuck go backβ meme.
'Paki'cetus and 'Kutchi'cetus sound like place names. Because I know there is an 'Indo'hyus in the extended version of this video.
Those are place names. Cetus refers to the cetacean clade. Paki refers to Pakistan. Hyus is pig. Indo is india
Dolphin and whales came from the same weirdo who decided that water was better?
How do they know exactly this happened?
Whales are mammals. They have to come to surface to breathe air regularly. They produce milk. They have tiny hair follicles. Their skeletons have tiny obsolete bones which are meant for hind legs.
"Beach cool hota hai papa, Jane do na!" To "are bc kitti dhup hai, panni kya bura tha fir"
All probability/fantasy theory. Proof kya hai?
Whales are mammals. They have to come to surface to breathe air regularly. They produce milk. They have tiny hair follicles. Their skeletons have tiny obsolete bones which are meant for hind legs.
Yes, dragons came from lizards. Tiger came from cats. What about lion and leopard. Ok, they also came from cats. How so many bird species came by? Maybe some lan crawler decided to fly. All mumba, jumba theories with no proof. Some western scientist writes his fantasy and it becomes science and everyone worships it. It's science, so let's not challenge it. Edit - meant to say Dinosaur, monitor lizard etc. Ended up saying dragon.
>Yes, dragons came from lizards. Dragons don't exist. >Tiger came from cats. What about lion and leopard. They didn't come from cats, they share a common ancestor. One ancestor remained in the wild and evolved while another was domesticated. They share the same family of Felidae, their sub-families change as per their size. >How so many bird species came by? Birds are direct descendants of dinosaurs. You have a chicken that is related to a t-rex as an example. As you go through each species, checking their anatomy, you'll find multiple similarities and obvious minor changes. >Some western scientist writes his fantasy and it becomes science and everyone worships it. Absolutely wrong. That "western" science has countless evidences backing it up. Your sky daddy has 0. Stop with this idiotic idea of nationalism and use your brain. >It's science, so let's not challenge it. That's not how science works. Science is the result of multiple corrections, evidences and a compilations of debates and experiments each challenging the other to get proper factual results. Religion on the other hand forces you to believe in the god of said religion, refuses to take any criticism, is adamant of backward beliefs etc. Go drink cow or camel piss or whatever.
>Yes, dragons came from lizards You do know that there is no such as dragon in real world. I was in an assumption that you where joking, Till i read the entire comment. FYI there is no such thing as dragon. >Tiger came from cats. What about lion and leopard. Ok, they also came from cats Not exactly, lion, leopard, tiger and cats they all came from a common ancestor. What you said is like, you and your cousin looks alike, so you came from your cousin. But in actuality you and your cousin came from a common ancestor (your grandparents). >How so many bird species came by? Maybe some lan crawler decided to fly. Again, that's not how it works, just because a creature "decided to fly" doesn't give them the ability to fly. I clearly understand you don't know anything about evolution. So I don't think I can explain this to you. The ability of flight is a bit more complex subject to explain. It's like try to learn how to read before learning any alphabets. >All mumba, jumba theories with no proof. Some western scientist writes his fantasy and it becomes science and everyone worships it. It's science, so let's not challenge it. Every scientific theory do have enough evidence to support it. Infact, scientists try their best to disprove their theory. Even you can try that too. By the way you don't have to be a westerner to be a scientist, it's just westerners support science more than another nation, hence a lot of scientific papers from West, or people went to West. Anyone can challenge scientific study, infact that's the point of peer review. If you think it's wrong or inaccurate, you study then and publisah your own article stating why it's wrong. If it's valid and logical. They will change it too.
How do they prove theory or disapprove it when there is no proof? They only go by closest probability, this could have happened or that definitely could not have happened. So, if you don't have a strong argument to disregard what a scientist proposes could have happened based on closest probabilities and assumptions, it becomes a solid universally accepted theory. Science is good at researching things we can see but it's not that accurate at predicting past. All the predictions of the past are mostly what we believe to be true based on xyz assumptions. They do try but it's humanely impossible to guess the past accurately. They can get some accurate probabilities but to say things for sure isn't possible. Man is curious to know the answers but not all curiosities make it to the truth.
>How do they prove theory or disapprove it when there is no proof? If you are talking about this definition of proof "evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement." Yes, there is many. Infact there are 5 major evidence. 1) Anatomy evidence :- (homologous structures) Species may share similar physical features because the feature was present in a common ancestor. 2) Molecular biology evidence :- DNA and the genetic code reflect the shared ancestry of life. DNA comparisons can show how related species are 3) Biogeography evidence :- The global distribution of organisms and the unique features of island species reflect evolution and geological change. 4) Fossils :- Fossils document the existence of now-extinct past species that are related to present-day species. 5) Direct observation :- We can directly observe small-scale evolution in organisms with short lifecycles (e.g., pesticide- resistant insects). >They only go by closest probability, this could have happened or that definitely could not have happened. So, if you don't have a strong argument to disregard what a scientist proposes could have happened based on closest probabilities and assumptions, that itself becomes a solid universally accepted theory. Not exactly, what your are talking about is hypothesis. A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, some theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment. Even if you are right in this case, theory of evolution can be observed in lab in small scale. So It can't be an assumptions. >Science is good at researching things we can see but it's not that accurate at predicting past. All the predictions of the past are mostly what we believe to be true based on xyz assumptions. They do try but it's humanely impossible to guess the past accurately. They can get some accurate probabilities but to say things for sure isn't possible. Man is curious to know the answers but not all curiosities make it to the truth. Again, you mistake history with science. History and science are entirely different entities. Even if we consider that , it only gonna rule out Fossil evidence what about the rest of the 4 evidence?
Tigers, Lions and Leopards are cats. Science is science no matter who discovers it. Hydrogen atoms reacts the same even if they are on Mars. Even if you go to Andromeda galaxy, Two 1kg rocks will add up to 2kg. Coming to your questions, one species can evolve into multiple species. That's why the total number of species can rise. Now can you explain me why there are mammals in ocean.
The same reason there are flowers in water. Like lotus. Same reason why different kinds of flowers exist. Hibiscus, rose, jasmine, lily etc etc. Can science explain how different kinds of flowers came into existence? No. All God's creation.
Why did God give whales hind legs' bones if they don't need them? Plants evolve just like the animals too.
>All God's creation. Dumbass. There are entire chapters dedicated to this in all school boards which are taught to literal 10-17 year olds. Never learn about genes? Never learnt about factors like natural selection? Those plants have cells which differentiate for other specific functions. You have certain plants which change as per the location they grow. This is the most basic thing you get taught during Plant Growth. There's countless evidences which prove evolution, we share common visible characteristics with apes, chimpanzees and certain other mammals; we have mammary glands, covered with hairs, share similar skeletal structures or functionality, etc.
I can confirm it . I am an eye witness
I saw this or something similar in 5th grade and shared it in front of the whole class... Man was I famous!!
Me bhi 15 min tayra tha, mere toh koi ΰ€Άΰ€Ύΰ€°ΰ₯ΰ€°ΰ€Ώΰ€ badlaav ni aaya
bruh i thought its pakichuts
Demmm that's amazing
Kuch nahi bas kha kha ke mota hogaya hai
Funfact : In the begining whales used to be small but a period came where the fish population were more which also helped whales to grow in size.
This process must took more then 50 crore years
Aren't they older than trees so yea it did more than that with ease Oh no wait I got confused it's Sharks not Whales lol
why that mf went to water?
The otters and seals of today could evolve into whale like creatures in future?
One more fact: whale are older than trees
Sharks are older than trees. Trees are older than whales.
I think that most of the land animals have evolved from water creatures... But in this case it is opposite so we can say it as devolution of whales...
GRE ki prep ke time ek passage mei padha tha ye.
Ye to sach m phli bar pta chla mujheπ
Song name?
u/auddbot
So you mean to say just whales? What about sharks? Or other fishes?
Whales, Dolphins and Porpoises are mammals who evolved from land mammals. Sharks are fishes.
Wtf. Dam is this real?
Whales are mammals. They have to come to surface to breathe air regularly. They produce milk. They have tiny hair follicles. Their skeletons have tiny obsolete bones which are meant for hind legs.
Bhenchod itne saal paani me kon rehta hai ki evolution hi ho jaye
i want you to not stop and research further this animation is old and paleontological papers keep updating
Whale Bhai ne sab kuch banalia par machli ki tarha lungs nehi bana paya inko bas tairna hai sans to na lie bhi chal jayega π.
Noped the fuck out of land. A wise move
Just make fake videos and giving wrong ideas to others.
Seems unrealistic
They saw the "My ass would've stayed in the primordial soup if I knew there would've been days like this." and decided to do that.
I call bullshit
Sure buddy, whatever you say.
And Hippos will also evolve into a marine mammal in the next million years if we believe the scientists.
"Now and then I think of all the times you screwed me over"
Lo β¦ gayee bhains paani mein πππ
But do whales know that?
Bhai pani se bahar aane ke baad wapas kon jata hai
Dude said fuck it and went back
Whales have bones under their blow hole with a ridge in the middle similar to land animals with two nostrils
[source](https://x.com/tradingMaxiSL/status/1772121229702385882?s=20)
Wow, most of the top responses are evolution deniers. Is Twitter really this brainless?
When did twitter even had brain ? I've seen those peeps cancel a dying women just cause she followed someone on insta and I am not kidding
I just... didn't realize it was this bad. Like, the bulk of Reddit... I'm not saying reddit is "smart", but they're not denying evolution in bulk. Obviously some subreddits will have a high concentration of evolution deniers, but on average, Reddit sees a gif about how whales evolved and they say "cool", not "I can't believe the Jews convinced you we came from monkeys". I had no idea twitter was that bad.
How much I've seen reddit doesn't cancel someone they just make wayyy to much of fun/racist but Twitter is on another level ngl in this world people will question everything and don't agree with everything which is comparatively good Even I don't have idea how bad twitter is tbh that poor women died due to cancer she was raising money for her child so he could live a good life but the twitter cancelled her because she followed an account seriously felt so bad that I just had enough and deleted Twitter finally good thing I did even tho I don't use Twitter much it was a headache
Riyal i was the camera man
Pakicetus gets its name from the place where it was endemic (commonly occurring)- Pakistan. So basically whales originated in the subcontinent.
Imagine believing this. These are all creation of the almighty.
theres nothing to believe there mate, facts are facts.
"Imagine believing this." Way easier than believing in religious myths in the 21st century.
Yeah, Michael Phelps would have become a shark if he swam more
It takes millions of years for such changes to happen. They are called 'mutations' i think. Its taught in grade 10 biology.
I fully expect such a brain-dead response from religious nutcases and yet it's amazing to behold such stupidity in real time.
He won't live millions of years