Wow that just doesn't make alot of sense to me. I may not know much about biology, it would seem to me like the opposite would be true, that as creatures evolved they would gain more information rather than loose it.
It's not that cut and dry. Some information in the genome is deleted, some genes are recessive (meaning certain traits will show up later down the line), others are gained by mutations which later become fixed in subsequent populations, etc, etc. When it comes to how things evolve, there isn't any one reason.
Did God make special animals just for Australia?
Obviously not. Marsupials mainly became isolated. Some still remain in places like North America (possums are marsupials) and also placental mammals like raccoons (closely related to marsupials).
When did snakes loose the ability to talk?
Is that a joke? Are you being facetious?
Isn't Homo sapiens sapiens like the 3rd or 4th wave of the Homo Species to branch out and occupy the globe?[/qs]
Pretty much. There are other subdivisions that formed from isolation, but Homo Sapiens weren't the only game in town.
I know Homo erectus made thier way all the way to China, and Indonesia, and Homo neanderthalensis was in Europe, South West Asia, and Central Asia, when our species got there. There is not enough evidence to say if we came from erectus or not (I think we did not), but we probably out competed neaderthals to extinction, are neaderthals and erectus somehow more due to the more information they had? I need to read more about this, because at face value its sounds very not plausable.
Actually
humans and neanderthals assimilated. They weren't so much out-competed as they were bred out of existence. There's an excellent chance that you have neanderthals in your family tree, as do I.
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from mistaken conviction." — Blaise Pascal
™ Version 4.2