Changes

In [[Theory of evolution|evolutionary]] biology, '''convergent evolution''' is the process by which two [[organisms]] or taxonomic groups have a character in common due to independently adapting to a similar environment or niche, not by [[homology]].

In [[Theory of evolution|evolutionary]] biology, '''convergent evolution''' is the process by which two [[organisms]] or taxonomic groups have a character in common due to independently adapting to a similar environment or niche, not by [[homology]].

An example of this would be the similarities in behavior and [[morphology]] between [[bat]]s and [[bird]]s. Although superficially very similar, the two groups are considered by evolutionists to be only very distantly related (being grouped only within the clade [[Reptilia]]). Their similarities are therefore considered to be a result of evolution in response to nearly identical ecological niches and pressures.  

An example of this would be the similarities in behavior and [[morphology]] between [[bat]]s and [[bird]]s. Although superficially very similar, the two groups are considered by evolutionists to be only very distantly related (being grouped only within the clade [[Reptilia]]). Their similarities are therefore considered to be a result of evolution in response to nearly identical ecological niches and pressures. A more prominent example is the similarity in [[morphology]] of large flightless birds in savanna environments across the globe, including the [[ostrich]], [[rhea]], [[emu]], and to a lesser extent [[cassowary]].

Convergent evolution is a theory and has not been observed in action.  Also, it presents the following conceptual problems.  First, it requires that random chance produce the same outcome in at least two independently occurring instances, which is substantially less likely even than doing so once.<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences21.html Convergent Evolution or Intelligent Design?]</ref>  Such evolutionary coincidence is a less plausble explanation than one that evolutionists assume away, namely, a common Designer.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i2/cuttlefish.asp Fascinating cuttlefish]</ref>  Second, because convergent evolution would work by random chance rather than by being intelligently guided, simple probability indicates that even if it produced a good result in a particular structure (e.g., an eye) in one organism, it might well produce a suboptimal result in that same structure in another organism.  No such result has been observed.

Convergent evolution is a theory and has not been observed in action.  Also, it presents the following conceptual problems.  First, it requires that random chance produce the same outcome in at least two independently occurring instances, which is substantially less likely even than doing so once.<ref>[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences21.html Convergent Evolution or Intelligent Design?]</ref>  Such evolutionary coincidence is a less plausble explanation than one that evolutionists assume away, namely, a common Designer.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i2/cuttlefish.asp Fascinating cuttlefish]</ref>  Second, because convergent evolution would work by random chance rather than by being intelligently guided, simple probability indicates that even if it produced a good result in a particular structure (e.g., an eye) in one organism, it might well produce a suboptimal result in that same structure in another organism.  No such result has been observed.