because there are alot of peters iin the world like obama
Yes.
Traits controlled by genes are subject to natural selection because they are heritable and can be passed on to offspring, allowing successful variations to increase in frequency over generations. Traits that are not controlled by genes, such as behavior or learned characteristics, are not directly influenced by genetic inheritance and therefore cannot be directly acted upon by natural selection.
all i know is that its False
Because populations evolve. If their was no hereditary transfer of traits by germ line genes then there would be no true selection. Acquired traits, such as a personal habit, are invisible to selection. Somatic mutations that could be beneficial are also invisible to selection. Selection only acts on what is, germ lines in individuals, transmissible to future generation and the gene pool.
The individual or his/her (assuming a sexed species) genes. Still a bit of a ' bone of contention in biology between these two levels; the gene and the individual. The only truly marginalized position as to ' target ' of selection is the group.
I'm assuming you meant "Why can only traits controlled by genes be acted upon by natural selection?" Genes hold all of the information that makes up something physically and to some extent psychological and that is what is past down to the offspring. That means any traits acquired can not be past down for example knowing how to hold a pen is not something that is stored in genes it is stored in memory therefore it can not be genetically passed down. If one day I were to get into a battle with a swords master I would win the battle because the pen is mightier then the sword. That would save my life and allow me to pass on my genes, but even though it played a role in natural selection by allowing me to live instead of the sword master it is not stored in the genes and therefore is not genetically passed down to the offspring.
dBecause the animal is adapted to its environment. :)
without variation's, all the members of a species would have the same traits.
Mutation is not a way in which natural selection affects the distributions of phenotypes. Mutations introduce new genetic variations, which can then be acted upon by natural selection to influence the distribution of phenotypes within a population.
I'm assuming you meant "Why can only traits controlled by genes be acted upon by natural selection?" Genes hold all of the information that makes up something physically and to some extent psychological and that is what is past down to the offspring. That means any traits acquired can not be past down for example knowing how to hold a pen is not something that is stored in genes it is stored in memory therefore it can not be genetically passed down. If one day I were to get into a battle with a swords master I would win the battle because the pen is mightier then the sword. That would save my life and allow me to pass on my genes, but even though it played a role in natural selection by allowing me to live instead of the sword master it is not stored in the genes and therefore is not genetically passed down to the offspring.
Selection and Environmental change
Assume you have a population of people of various genetically influenced heights; they all varied in height potential. They all were raised in an environment that was deprived of basic nutrients and all were somewhat stunted in growth. A person that would have been tall in a normal environment passes on those genes for tallness in his deprived -of -nutrients environment, so his sons/daughters, if properly feed, would grow tall. So you see, natural selection must work on the genetic/individual variation and not variations that are not inherited.