Joined: May 2006
|I don't think I'd find it particularly odd for a joey to carry on a mutation that changed the structure of it's leg, for example.|
so behavior and morphology are quantitatively different in your mind?
somehow a very minor change in behavior, like crawling a tiny bit farther, it a harder thing for evolution to produce than the loss of a couple of toes, the extreme lengthening of metacarpal bones, etc?
you have some mighty odd notions there, kiddo.
| I'd expect the baby wallaby would be smaller than a joey.|
nope, they aren't (significantly), when first born. and not surprisingly, it's completely irrelevant to the relative distance each type of joey has to crawl for its first meal.
what I was trying to get you to see what that the physical differences between a wallaby and one of the larger roos is mostly just a matter of size, while the changes between modern equines and their ancestors is gigantic.
what you find incredulous, IOW, is far more easily explained by a simple shift in the size of roos than the differences betwen modern equines and their acestors is, and yet, we have a very good series of fossils tracking the changes between modern and ancestral horses.
which of course leads back to why we find your statement so odd, and ask the same question:
why would you find the increasing travel distance of roo joeys to be more incredible than the change between modern and ancestral equines?
my guess would be that SOMEONE stuck that particular notion in your head.
care to share?
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."