nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 46:
Line 46: − + +
→I would think…: Just so story
<li>Wombat's young have a greater incidence of survival, thus also conferring a benefit.
<li>Wombat's young have a greater incidence of survival, thus also conferring a benefit.
<br><br>
<br><br></ol>
Hypothetically, we could also imagine a scenario where the wombat's young better survived because predators were acclimated to forward-facing pouches. --[[User:Linus M.|Liπus the Turbohacker]]<sup>([[User talk:Linus M.|contact me]])</sup> 13:03, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
Hypothetically, we could also imagine a scenario where the wombat's young better survived because predators were acclimated to forward-facing pouches. --[[User:Linus M.|Liπus the Turbohacker]]<sup>([[User talk:Linus M.|contact me]])</sup> 13:03, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
:True, it is not conclusive. Very few arguments taken in isolation are. However, this is just another example of an evolutionary [[just so story]]—pure speculation without any evidence and almost certainly requiring multiple interdependent biological changes, not the sort of thing that would come about "with a mutation". [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 19:45, 11 May 2007 (EDT)