Evolution

Cross this set of alleles. Aa X AA

The a is a deleterious genetic defect and in a small population the carriers of this defect will breed with each other in a probabilistically greater number.

Why do species rise from a small sample necessarily? They do not always do that. A geographically isolated species may be very large.

Regardless, look to the alleles I showed you. Probabilities are all. Say this cross in our small population.I showed these alleles existing.

Aa X Aa

This cross yields 1/4 AA, and probabilistically a small population could get out of deleterious trouble; or they could, after a time, go extinct. Lots of random events in the history of life.

you and monkey and almals

Perhaps, coupled with sexual selection. Take the elephant seal. The preference of females for large males to head the harems drove the evolution of larger and larger variance in the size of the males to the females and rather quickly.

The morphological species concept differentiates species by their physical traits, basically. The biological species concept defines a species as generally organisms that breed with others of the same species; rather a genetic isolation concept. The phylogenetic concept is based on evolutionary relationships and is the concept used by cladists.

The result of natural selection is that those individuals whose characteristics(health, strength, camouflage, skills etc) made them more suited to survive would indeed be the ones who survived at least long enough to successfully breed, and passed on their characteristics to their offspring.

No! The theory of evolution by natural selection is an explanation of one of the more important mechanisms for evolution. It has little to nothing to do with the tribal conflicts in populations of Homo sapiens that live in the same environment.

His famous book, "On the Origin of Species", detailing his observations of species adaptation (especially finches of the Galapagos Islands) culminated in his theory of evolution, which has had great impact, both sociologically and scientifically, to this day.

B. Allopactric speciation on island archipelagos. As the organisms move from island to island rapid speciation is observed because of variations in resource acquisition more than just variation in environment. Amplified radiation is observed. Example is finches on the Galapagos Islands. Hawaii also gives this example.

Take the cytochrome C electron shuttle in the electron transport chain and see how it is highly conserved in form and function among a wide variety of eukaryotes. That is molecular evidence for the relatedness of widely disparate organisms.

Reproductive success is the coin evolution pays in.

They are shared and used by every living thing on earth and many whole sequences of DNA show close correlation, or exact sequence. One can actually follow the mutation trail from a common ancestor to the descendents that branch off from this ancestor.

Only evolutionary theory explains this as the creationist explanation, many separate creations and linear progressions of organisms, can not explain the shared and variant sequence trail.

Yes, use the Hardy-Weinburg equilibrium equation.

False

He might not of if Malthus had not been around but he depended on the works of Lyell.

To pit it in a more accurate form; the theory of evolution by natural selection. Not a belief, a theory in the scientific sense.

Good ol' punctuated equilibrium.

Not necessarily. If one insists on religious ideology instead of the scientific evidence, then one may generate a problem for yourself.

Evolutionary theory does not have anything to say specifically on the existence of gods. All science adheres to methodological naturalism. This means we have no need of a god hypothesis.

This is called analogous traits. When two different types of organisms are in the same type of environment, usually geographically separated, they come up with very similar adaptions to their local environment.

Upbringing, if parental care is meant, influences personality little, but other things, like overall happiness, are important products of parental care.

The environment, especially the unique environment, is as important as the genes in all human traits. It is not a dichotomy and it is nature via nurture. What we measure is the squared variance from the mean, the differences in influence. We do not measure and can not measure the positive weight of either genes or environment influencing people.

Multi-cellular animals also called metazoans came from protists which were colonilized. These colonies of protists formed hollow spheres. These protists which were linked together into a hollow sphere may have had some form of specialization to then make tissue.

p^2 + 2pq + q^2 = 1

The question answers itself: the characteristic is passed onto few or no offspring, and therefore will not spread throughout the population.

Glycolysis produces large quantities of NADH producing large amounts of energy. Glycolysis can also be carried out throughout the cell, which gives it an advantage over the TCA and Oxidative phosphorylation cycles that occur in the mitochondria. (:

2 main ideas he had which turned out to be incorrect: He speculated that genes are carried in the blood- while this is not far from the truth, it was later proved that genes are carried in each cell (and so, by a twist of fate, proving the basis of Evolutionary theory) He also made a variety of mistakes in his version of the Tree of Life- Although modern science still hasn't fully worked this one out, it has got far enough to prove that, although he was right in principal, the branching from common ancestors is more complex (more of a web of life) than in his diagrams. It is interesting that the disproving of his tree of life actually strengthens the argument for evolution.

Not sure quite how, but a cargo of balsam on board the ship caught fire and Alfred Russel Wallace plus all the crew had to abandon ship. Wallace lost almost every one of the many specimens he was bringing back to England.