Zachriel
Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
So, scientists suspected there might be earlier events, but they didn't have enough evidence to support their suspicion. So what did those dratted evolutionists do? They went and looked for, and then found, the evidence.
| Quote | | Jiao explained that, over the generations, most duplicated genes from polyploidy events simply are lost. However, other genes adopt new functions or, in some instances, subdivide the workload with the genetic segments that were duplicated, thereby cultivating more efficiency and better specialization of tasks for the genome as a whole. |
| Quote | | "Ever since Charles Darwin so famously called the rapid diversification of flowering plants in the fossil record an 'abominable mystery,' generations of scientists have worked to solve this puzzle," dePamphilis said. "We used to say that most of the hundreds of thousands of successful species of flowering plants show genetic traces of ancient polyploidy events. The further we push back the date of when these events happened, the more confidently we can claim that, not most, but all flowering plants are the result of large-scale duplications of the genome." |
Darn them Evolutionists!
--------------
You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.
|
