This reminded me of the fascinating obversation of convergent evolution, the "independent evolution of similar features in species of different periods or epochs in time" [1].
For example, the concept of flight has evolved independently numerous of times (insects, birds, pterosaurs, and bats), so it would not be unreasonable to assume that it would evolve again, were life to start over from scratch.
This question make no sense in the context of evolution. What do you think it's like pokemon where a species achieves the necessary requirements and suddenly it evolves into a different species?
Then what is evolution trying to explain ? I thought it was explaining how primates evolved to humans, not just micro evolution at the DNA level ? For all practical purposes these are considered stable states in that they are different enough (visually, internally, intellectually) so as not to be considered continuous i.e. just differing by some epsilon.
Are you saying evolution does not claim to answer this and this is a question not worth asking?
I have a feeling the gist of what I am asking is clear enough but we are getting lost in words. I just asked for a link on Amazon that talks about testing/simulating/demonstrating evolution for snapshots enough far apart in time where we would say yes these organisms are pretty different, something like the snapshots demonstrated here: http://www.bot1320.nicerweb.com/Locked/media/ch11/taxonomy.h...
reply