Evolution

Punctuated equilibrium is not ' a theory of evolution ' but well ensconced within modern evolutionary theory. Scientists look for evidence, not proof. The evidence suggests that punctuated equilibrium and incremental change are not mutually exclusive and both can occur in nature.

The two main factors are mutation and natural selection.

Mutations are random changes in our DNA that cause changes. Some of these changes are bad, some are neutral, and some are good.

This is where natural selection comes in. If the mutation is bad, then that organism is less likely to mate and pass down the gene. The organism dies along with the mutation that made it less fit. If it is neutral, which is what most mutations are, then nothing happens. If it is good, then the organism is more likely to survive and pass down the gene which will then propagate through the species.

Charles Darwin is credited with developing the theory of evolution through natural selection in his book "On the Origin of Species," published in 1859. Darwin’s work revolutionized the field of biology by proposing that species evolve over time in response to environmental pressures.

We have conducted studies of the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) of mitochondria (mtDNA), organelles within cells that have their own unique DNA. This DNA is usually inherited only from the mother, and so changes in it serve as a useful clock for timing speciation events. We have, for example, replaced the mitochondrial DNA of cow egg cells with those from rabbits, fertilized these eggs and allowed them to gestate. The calves are born with the mtDNA of lagomorphs, and they live just fine, which shows there is nothing intrinsic to rabbit mtDNA that will not work in cows.

We can construct a hierarchy of life very similar to the tree designed by Linnaeus using mitochondrial DNA. This tree demonstrates the interconnectedness--the shared ancestry of life. This is probably the key genetic evidence for evolution.

There are plenty of other good pieces of evidences. Endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) are snippets of DNA inserted into genes or introns which then may be passed from one generation to the next. There is no compelling reason for the same sequences of foreign DNA in similar organisms aside from that of common ancestry.

As for human beings, we have our own tell-tale genetic evidence. Our #2 chromosome is clearly the result of a fusion of two earlier primate chromosomes. The evidence for this is abundantly clear. In addition, we also have a non functioning gene, L-gulonolactone oxidase (GULO) for the syntehsis of ascorbic acid we share with our simian ancestors. Why should monkeys and men share this common defect aside from common ancestry?

The theory says that living things have changed over time and are not static. Charles Darwin proposed a way it could have happened, namely by natural selection. For example, the finch with the larger bill is better fit in an environment with mostly nuts than the finch with the smaller bill. It was later found through technology that living things mutate so over time, the thing with slightly better mutations survives. All this detail is more specific than the theory of evolution, which just says that living things change (so evolution simply predicts change). Sorry it took to long to answer.

Changes in the gene pool are part of the evolutionary process, which encompasses both adaptation to the environment as well as other mechanisms of change such as genetic drift and gene flow. Adaptation specifically refers to the process by which organisms become better suited to their environment through natural selection acting on heritable traits.

Improves the likelihood of survival.

Mating does this because it allows for much quicker evolution due to the new combinations of DNA that results from two parents rather than the asexual reproduction of a single organsism which basically results in a clone of itself.

Opponents may argue that there is not enough evidence to support evolution, that the fossil record is incomplete, or that the complexity of living organisms cannot be explained by natural selection alone. They may also question the idea that life arose from non-living matter through natural processes.

Charles Darwin is credited with developing the theory of evolution through natural selection. Published in his work "On the Origin of Species" in 1859, Darwin proposed that species evolve over time through a process of natural selection, where individuals with advantageous traits are more likely to survive and reproduce.

The evolution of oxygenic photosynthesis by early cyanobacteria around 2.4 billion years ago significantly altered Earth's atmosphere by increasing oxygen levels. This sudden rise in oxygen caused a mass extinction event as many anaerobic organisms were unable to survive in the new oxygen-rich environment. Life forms that adapted to aerobic metabolism thrived, leading to the diversification of more complex organisms.

Algae reproduce sexually through a process known as isogamy, in which similar-sized gametes fuse to form a zygote. The evolution of sexual reproduction in algae is believed to have occurred around 1.2 billion years ago and provided survival advantages through genetic diversity. As algae evolved, they developed more complex reproductive strategies, such as anisogamy and oogamy, which involve the production of gametes of different sizes. These different reproductive strategies have contributed to the diversity and success of algae in various environments.

Actually, the process of a gene changing within a lifespan is not called evolution. Evolution refers to changes in the genetic makeup of a population over many generations. Changes in a gene within an individual's lifespan may be due to mutations or environmental factors, but this does not necessarily lead to evolution.

With the nested hierarchy of phylogenetic trees in front of you, showing in general relief the biochemical, physiological, behavioral relatedness extended from the forked nodes, and going along through time one sees evolution in action. Change over time.

The mechanisms of evolution are called natural selection, genetic drift, gene flow, and mutation. These mechanisms work together to drive changes in populations over time, leading to the diversity of life we see today.

Chemical evolution: the evolution of the elements (building blocks of matter)

biological evolution: the small scale change in a population that can be passed from generation to generation

Both of these are changes that occur to gradually create a new species or substance

The theory that proposes evolution occurs steadily in tiny changes over long periods of time is gradualism. This idea suggests that species evolve slowly and continuously through small, incremental changes rather than through sudden, dramatic shifts.

Darwin proposed that natural selection takes place as individuals best suited to their environment survive and reproduce, passing on their advantageous traits to offspring. This leads to the gradual progression of characteristics that are favorable for survival in a given environment.

Evolution can speed up due to factors like environmental changes, new selection pressures, genetic mutations that provide a survival advantage, or genetic drift in small populations. These factors can push populations to adapt and evolve at a faster rate to increase their chances of survival and reproduction in their changing environment.

DNA provides greater stability and accuracy in storing genetic information compared to RNA. This makes DNA less prone to errors and mutations, allowing for more efficient replication and inheritance of genetic material. This likely led to the switch to DNA-based genetic systems during evolution on Earth.

The punctuated equilibrium model of evolution suggests that evolution occurs in rapid bursts of change separated by long periods of stability. This model emphasizes the idea that species evolve quickly in response to environmental changes, leading to abrupt shifts in their characteristics over relatively short periods of time.

Nowhere. Evolutionists who do not believe in the idea that man has a soul, do not believe that a person goes anywhere after death, but that once the person dies, he or she ceases to exist. There are of course some who are evolutionists and who do believe in the existence of the soul.

One can only assume that by "evolutionist" you mean people who have concluded that the theory of evolution is a good explanation for the development of life on earth. However, these people are not uniform with respect to beliefs such as religion, heaven, or god, so that your question cannot be answered. What, did you imagine that only atheists accepted evolution?

Cells are the base unit of living organisms. At the beginning of life, the first organisms must have been single cells like today's bacteria. All organisms have evolved from that simplest prokaryotic cell, and from unicellular, multicellular organisms evolved. Also, all of biochemistry changes with Natural Selection, as does genetics. The biochemistry of the cell and cell differentiation has evolved. Photosynthetic cells, immune cells, nervous cells.... All have evolved with the higher organisms and have given them their identities of having neurological systems, immune systems or the ability to photosynthesise.

Since life's basic unit is the cell, the basic unit of evolution (of the phenotype) is indeed largely the cell too. From zygote develops organism within the constraints of that species' evolution, cell by cell by cell by differentiated cell.

Morphological stasis refers to a lack of change or evolution in the physical traits or structures of a species over an extended period of time. This can occur when a species is well adapted to its environment and experiences little pressure to evolve.

The notion that we only use some fraction of our brain is based on an oversimplification of an outdated understanding of how the brain actually works (in other words, it's wrong). It may be true that at any given time only a small fraction of your neurons are firing, but that's more because you don't often have a need for the neurons that govern, say, remembering exactly what benzaldehyde smells like (cherries, if you're interested).

There's no reason to think that geniuses use a "higher percentage" of their brains than anyone else.... they just do it better, somehow, and we really don't understand exactly how.

There is no secret, chemical or morphological, behind a genius using his brain more effectively and successfully than many others. He simply keeps his neurons free of other electrical and chemical impulses, impurities, disturbances, disruptions, cross-currents and short-circuits such as those caused by sudden or continuing erruptions of anger, hate, lust and so on. The ancient Indian philosophers have defined this state of the resultant chemical and electrical special balance as Cleanliness Of Conscience or Kundtalini. Where many people are prone to diverge in their thoughts, emotions and feelings, they are clear-conscious enough to make them converge, thereby reducing the need for using more neurons. Anyway complex thoughts result in the formation of more chemical combinations and more intense and intricate electrical discharges. The projecting of the fore head frontwards in the cource of evolution increased the internal volume of the skull by which more quantity of brain could it contain, which has been critical in the emergence of intellect in man. The erection of the backbone unlike in animals also has been a critical factor. When the backbone remained horizontal to the axis of the Earth, all the excess energy produced was being arrested and pulled down to earth by the gravitational force. But once it became erect, it was freed from the magnetic pull of the earth and all excess and unused energy went straight to the brain and it developed. It is not strange that a sitting sleeper is more conscious and alert than a lying sleeper. When compared to animals, all men are geniuses once they get rid of all rubbish in their brain and do not overcrowd it.

Predators create a selective pressure on a population. For example, birds that eat insects put a selective pressure on the insects to have better camouflage. Lions that run fast put a selective pressure on their prey to be able to run even faster.

Its the same as a selective pressure created by the environment like adaptation to living in a cold environment. Those that can survive the cold the best live. The insects with the best camouflage survive as do the animals that can run the fastest.