Punctuated Equilibria: The Basics

The other phase of punk-eek as I understand it, is that once this new species has evolved it expands outside its "incubation" habitat, and pushes into the areas inhabited by the parent population, displacing it. In the fossil record this looks like one species being replaced by a different one, with no intermediates at this species level.Creationists like to point to this as evidence of special creation of new species.For an idea of how a small initial population could spread into other habitats see Differential Dispersal Of Introduced Species - An Aspect of Punctuated Equilibrium. This takes several species that were introduced into North America with small initial populations and looks at their survival.

quote:

---

1. European House Sparrow
2. European Starling
3. English Skylark
4. Crested Myna
5. Chukar
6. Budgerigar
7. Rose-ringed Parakeets

​

Conclusions

​

Thus we see two extremely successful dispersions and others of limited success and finally some that succeeded only to lose out to later competition. Obviously not all introductions are successful, and just as obviously not all newly evolved species will win out in similar circumstances.

​

Native species are being impacted by the "successful" introductions (Starlings and House Sparrows) but they are still viable at this time (probably most impacted is the Eastern Bluebird). There was no eco-niche vacuum for the newcomers to fill and there was competition, but they have been able to disperse across the continent.

​

Any one of these would have appeared "suddenly" and "without any transitions" in the fossil record.

​

(Once a new species has evolved it could disperse in much the same way, and if they evolved in isolation in a small area or an area that didn't make fossils then there would be no record of any transitions).

---

While these examples are all birds and thus able to disperse widely fairly rapidly, the same process would hold for other organisms, with the rapidity of the dispersal dependent on their mobility.Enjoy

What is "large scale change?"When I was exploring horse evolution on the Dogs will be Dogs will be ??? I did not see any specific change I would call "large scale" ... just the variations seen in dogs ... (further discussion on this concept should probably be best done on that thread).In punk-eek the new species appears in the fossil record, but there are obvious multiple homologies with older fossils found in the same geographical location, showing a clear path of lineage, and no radical change (nothing beyond what we see in the variations of dogs).So what is "large scale change?"Enjoy

What is a "large morphological gap?" So what is a "large morphological gap?"EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

and again what are "large morphological gaps?" So, again, what is a "large morphological gap?"Enjoy

Which is why creationism is useless pseudoscience.Curiously the theory of PE has been tested (see above re snails, also see Differential Dispersal Of Introduced Species - An Aspect of Punctuated Equilibrium.Another thing to look at is the geographical-temporal (space-time) matrix the fossils are embedded in and their relationship to sister populations (see Alfred Russel Wallace and Biogeography):

quote:

---

The following law may be deduced from these facts:--Every species has come into existence coincident both in space and time with a pre-existing closely allied species.

---

This is known as Wallace's "Law of Sarawak" and it precedes Darwin's book.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

Except that PE is specifically about what happens in a species. I also note that you ignored the thread Differential Dispersal Of Introduced Species - An Aspect of Punctuated Equilibrium which documents several cases of rapid dispersal of introduced species into a new (to them) ecology.Starlings, for instance, are now ubiquitous in the US after a small flock was introduced in the 1890's. This would appear in a fossil record as instantaneous (geological time). after Dawkins' "ignorance is no crime":I have been giving this a bit a thought and would like to break it down slightly differently:Five types of people that don't understand how evolution/biology/science work:

1. people too stupid to understand the concepts. These are the unfortunates. It is not their fault.
2. people ignorant of the concepts, possibly through no fault of their own. These are the fortunates -- they can be cured via education. A good starting source is Berkeley: Evolution 101.
3. people that have been misinformed. These are the deceived. It may be possible to cure them with education, however the victims need to be willing to learn, and willing to give up the false concepts they have regarding how evolution/biology/science work. Cognitive dissonance comes into play here when this affects core beliefs that are strongly held.
4. people who are charlatans. These are the people that do the deceiving of others. These are the deplorables. They too can be deceived (and likely deceive themselves), however they continue to present falsehoods even when they have been corrected. Trolls also fit in this category.
5. people who are clinically insane. These are also unfortunates, as it is not their fault.

Rejecting information does not refute it, that just puts you in one of the 5 categories above.Enjoy

6. Bubble people, those that have a strongly held belief that makes it impossible for them to accept an idea that contradicts it. Such information just bounces off the bubble.Enjoy

All evolution occurs at the species level because that's where the breeding populations interact with the ecological challenges.Enjoy