From: "Gary Britt" 

I particularly like the ring examples where it is assumed implicitly that
birds and animals only mover around in one circular direction.  Yeah that's
got me sold.

Gary

"John Beckett"  wrote
in message news:m25rn1903vs8qdj423i9gf435gdjruqh7j{at}4ax.com...
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news::
> > So evolution can not be directly observed ...
>
> I did mention a couple of ways that you CAN observe evolution.
>
> I was just commenting on the fact that it is a misunderstanding of what
> actually happens to imagine that if you gathered enough fossils, or took
> enough samples with a time machine, that you could OBSERVE evolution. The
> drift from one species to another is so gradual that there would be no
> point where you would say "Aha - That's where the change occurred".
>
> This point is relevant to the discussion here about what a species is.
> Many scientists believe it is a waste of time worrying about exactly what
> a species is, because given the right circumstances and a lot of time, one
> species may become another species.
>
> Or, as Bill was saying, there are a number of examples of "ring
evolution"
> where a species inhabits a large area, possibly forming a ring. All around
> the ring, neighbours can and do interbreed. They are all one species.
> However, individuals from the beginning and the end of the ring are
> significantly different and will NOT interbreed. The evolution is so
> gradual that you cannot see a difference between one local group and the
> neighbouring groups. Yet, the differences add up to something significant.
>
> One example:
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/05/2/l_052_05.html
>
> John
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5