Darwin's essay

Anonymous
timer Asked: Jun 16th, 2018
account_balance_wallet $20

Question description

The first writing assignment is the 2004 National Geographic article "Was Darwin Wrong?" by David Quammen. Please read the article and write a 3-4 page paper (double-spaced, 10-12 pt font, 1000-1500 words) for submission. Each paper should consist primarily of a review of the article (tell me what the article was about), with a short discussion at the end (1/2 page or 2-3 paragraphs)

Do not cut-n-paste from the text or other sources, and do not include quotations from the article. For the discussion section, pick out and discuss some aspect of the article that you found to be the most interesting, surprising, and/or problematic. Please discuss why this topic was noteworthy to you. Feel free to express your personal opinions, including agreement or disagreement with Quammen's arguments (and your reasoning behind these stances).

Article 2 Was Darwin Wrong? DAVID QuAMMEN E volution by natural :.election, lhe ccnlral concept or the life's work of Ch:ule> Darwin, is :o theory. It's a theory about the origin of adaptation. complexity. and diversity among Eanh's living creatures. If you arc skeptical by nature. unfamiliar will> the terminology of :,cience. and unaware of 1hc overwhelming evidence, you might even he tempted to a me sense, relalivity as described by Albert Einslcin is 'just" :t theory. The notion that Earth orbits around the suo rather than vice versa, uflered by Copernicus in 1543, is a theory. Continental drifl is a 1hcory. The suucrure. and dynamics or atoms? Aromic theory. C\'en electricity i> n theoretical con evolved from other lifeforms without any involvement of a god. The most stanling thing about these poll numbers is not that so many Americans reject c'olutioo. but that the sU>tistical breakdown basn't changed much in two decades. Gallup interviewet·s posed exactly the same choices in 1982. 1993, 1997, and 1999. The creutionisr conviction-that God alone.. :.nd not an explanatory swtement that fits the evidence. They embrace such an explanalion coniidcntly but it as 1heir best available view of reality, ar least umil M>Llle severely conflicting do1a "'some bener explanation mizht come alonr,. Tbe rest of us gener.1lly agree. We plug our television, IntO little wall sockets, measure a by the lenj!th of Earth's orbit. und in many Olher ways Jiveou1'lives based on tJlc trusted rculily of those theories. Evolu!ionary lheory, tllough. is a bil me people lind it unacceptable. despite the vast body of supporting evidence. As applied to our own species, llo11w sapiens, it c:u1 seem more threatening stilL Many fundamentalist ChristiMs and ultra<>rthodox Jews take alarm at the thought that human descent from earlier primate' contradicts a strict reading of lhe Book of Gcnc.,is. Their discomfort is paralleled by Islamic creatjonists such as Harun author of a recent volume ti1lc::d Tire E•·olution Deceil, who points to tlle six-day creation story in Koran as literal truth and calls the theory of evolution "nodling but a deception imposed on us by 1hc domina10<> ofthc world system." The late Sriln Prnbhupada. of the Hare Krishna movement, explained that God created "the 8.400,000 species of life frorn the very bcgilllling;· in order to establish multiple tiers of reincarnation for risin;; souls. Although souls ascend. !he 1hemselves don't change. he in•i>ted. di lucidly explained. Sure. we ·,e all heard of Charlc> Darwin. and ()fa vague. notion about and survival that sonlCtimcs goes by thcc:Hchall bbcl "Darwinism." 13ullhe main sources ofinfom1arion rrum which mw.t Americans have drawn Lheir awa.rcm.."SS or this subj«t. il arc h3ph:tzard qne...; at best: cultural osmo,is. newspaper and magazine rercreoces. half-baked nature documemaries on the tube, and hearsay. Evolution is both u beautiful concept and an impo11an1 one. more crucial nowadays to human welfare. to medical 'cicncc. and to our understanding of tllc "orld than ever before. It's also deeply persuasive--a theory you c•m t.'lke ro the bank. Tbe 5 ANNUAL EDITIONS essential points are for ;md against his theory-because he dido't wru1t to flame out in a burst of unpersuasive notoriety. He may have delayed, more cc.unp1icatcd than most people aS' and Varieties Through Nmural Sdt•c· tion, but his publisher found Lhat insufficiently catchy.) The aJanning event was his receiving a leuer and an enclosed manu- Ori.r:in appeared, and so inllucntial in lhc long run, was lhm it offered a rational explanation of bow evolution must oectlr. The same insight came indcpcndc.ntly to Alfred Russel Wallace, a young naturalist doing field work in the Malay Archipelago during the late 1850s. In historical annals, if not in the popular awareness, Wallace and Darwin script ftom Alftcd Wallace, whom he knew only as a distant pen the kudos for having discovered nat- pal. Wa11ace•s :o;ketchcd out the great ideaevolution hy selection-that O;lrwin considered his mvn. Wallace had s<:ribblcxl this paper m1<.l (unaware o l' IJarwin 's own evolutionary thinking, which far had been kept private) mailed it tv h im from A1·chipelagv. a lo,lg wilh a requesL for re.lction ;md help. Darwin was holTified. After hv<.. dcc.ades of ural selection. The gisl o f the conce-pt is that small, nmdom, differences among individuals resu_lt in different chances of survival and for some, dc(tlh withoul uffsprl1.1g for others-and that thi::: muural cull ing leacts to signific.ant changes in size, streng1h, :mnamcnt, color, hiochcrnis- painstaking cll'ort, now he'd be scooped. Or maybe nol quite. lie \VaJiacc•s paper toward puhlicalion, though rnanaging nlso to assert own p rior c lttim by releasing t\VO excC1TJIS try, and behavior muong the Excess p<>pulatinn growth drives the compelitive struggle. Jess I competitors produce fewe r surviving offspring, the useless or ucgative from his unpublished work. '!'hen he dashed off the Origin. bis "abstract" on the subject. Unlike Wallace. who was younger and tend to disappear. whereas the useful varia· tions tend to be perpetuated and gradually magnified throughout a population. So much for one part of the evolutionary pl'(}(.'eSS. k nown less meticulous, Darwin reco&rnized the impurtancc of provic.J- ing an edifice of supporting e\•idence and logic. as T he anagenesis, during which a single species is transformed. But ns he pre.-.:cntcd iL. most ly fell wilhin rour cate- gories: bivgcography, paleontology, emb•yology, and morpho!· ogy. Bioge ography is Ihe swdy or the gcographicaJ di:)tributjou a lso a second part. known as speciation. Genetic changes somcLimcs accumulate within au isolatc:d segment or a species. but not d)rough.out tbe whole, as that isolated population adapl.s to its local conditions. Gradually it goes its own seizing a new ecological niche. At a certain point it becomes iJTcvcrsibly of living creatures-that is. which species inhabit which parts of the planet and why. Paleontology investigates extinct lifeforms. a.<; n:ve;ded in the fossil record. Embryology examines the revealing stages of (echoing earlier stages of evolutionary history) that embryos pass through before birth or hatching: at a stretch, embryology also concerns the imma· ture forms of animals that metamorphose, such as the larvae of itlSects. Morphology is the science of anatomical shape and design. Darwin devoted sizable sectio ns of The Origin of Species co these categories. Biogeography, for instance, offered a great pageant of peculiar distind-that is, so different that its members can't interbreed with the rest. Two species now exist where formerly there was one. Darwin called that splining-and-specializing phenomenon the "principle of divergence.'' It was an importam part of his theory, explaining the overall diversity of life as well as the adapta tion of individual species. This thrilling and radical assemblage of concepts came from an unlikely source. O;.lf'\viu was shy (Uld ructkulous. <• wealthy landowner with close friends among t.hc Anglican clergy. He had a gentle, unassuJning manner, a strong ne-ed for p1ivacy, and <.)n excrnordinary comrniuncnt lO imcllcclUa1 honesty. As facls aud paucrus. Anyone \VbO co.osiders the biogeog.rapbjcal data, Darwin wrote, must be Strock by the mystet"ioos cluster- ing pattern among what he called "closely allied" specics-th:H is, similru· creatures sharing roughly the same body p.lan. Such closely allied species tend to be found on the same continent (several spccic.s of zebras in Atiica} or within the same group of oceanic islru.1ds (dozens of species of honeycreepe"' in Hawaii, an undergraduate at Cambridge, he b.ad studied halfheartedly toward becoming a c.;lcrgyu1om himself, befote he <.Jiscovered his reaJ vocation as a scientist. Later, having u good but conventional reputation in natural history, he spent 22 years secre-tly gathering evidence and pondering argumcnts- tx>th 13 species of Galapagos finch). despite their species-by-species prcfctences for different habitats, food sources. or conditions 6 Article 2. Was Darwin Wrong? of climate. Adjoetnt areas of South America, Darwin noted, nrc occupied by two similar spccic.s of large. fligh tlc.,s birds (the rheas. Rhefl tuncrimna and P1erocnemia pe!lnaUt), not by ostriches in Africa or emus as in Australia. South America also bas agouti\ and viscacbas (snull rodents) in terrestrial habitat<. plu.< and capybaras in the well:mds. not- as Darwin wrote-bare;, and in terrc;trial habitats or beavers and in t.hc wetlands. During his own youthful visit to tbe Galiipagos, aboard the survey ship Beagle. Darwin himself had dbcovercd three very similar forms of mockingbird, each on a dill'etent island. Why should "closely allied" >es over the eons, lightly peppered with fossils. a langiblc which .species lived when. ancient layers of rock lie; a1op more ancient ones (ext-ept where geologic force' have lipped or • huffied them). and lil.cwbc: with the anim.tl IUld plii.Ot fos.'il' that the strata CQntain. Whut Darwin noticccJ about this j, that closely allied species tend to be found adjacent to one onolher in successive SU"J la. One species endures for millions or years and then last appearance in, say, the middle Eocene epocb: just above. a •iouilar but not identical specie' replaces it In North America. for example. a '"'guely horselike creature known as 1/ymrmhtn'tmJ was by OrollitJfJUS. then £pi1Jippus. then Mcsohippu.)·, which in tum we re by a varieLy of horsey American crincr.-.. Some of them even gal· aquarium. Living creatures can be easily soned into a hierarchy uf cutegories- notjust species but genera, families, orders, who le kingdoms-based 0 11 which anatomical characte rs they ;,hare and which they don't. All vcrtebr:ue animal< have backbone;. Among venebr:ues. birds ha\'C feather... whereas reptiles ha• c: ..:ales. Mammals have fur and mammary glands. D()( feathers or ;calc;,. Among mammals. some have pnuches in which they nurxe their tiny young. Among these species, the marsupials, some have huge rear legs go hopping across miles of arid and 'tnJng tails by which outback.: we <:<4lthem kangaroos. Bring in modem microscopic and molecular evidence. and you can rrnce the still further back. All ptanh and fungi, as well a, animal>. have nuclei within their cells. AU living organisms contain DNA and RNA (ex.cept so me wilh RNA on ly), two related form,-. of molccuJcs. Such a pattern of tiered resemblances groups of specie> nested within broader grouping<, and all descending from a single sourcc- bn't naturally present among other collections of items. Yuu won't find anything equivalent if you t.ry to rocks. or musicaJ or jewelry. W hy nor! Because rock types and styles of jewelry don't reflect descent from common Biological diversity The number of characteristics between any one and another indicates how recently 1hose two have diverged from a lineage. Tha1 insight gave new meaning to the tnsk of wxonornic c las· si flcation, which had been founded in it> modem form back in 1735 by the Swedish nat.W".tl.i.St Llnnaeu<. Linnaeu< showed how species could be systematically classified, 3CCOrd ing to tl1eir shared similarities, but he worked from creatinnist assumptions that ofTcn."(l no material cxplanatio11 for the nested p:Htern he found . ln the early and middle 19th century, morpholo- lopct.l acrw:-. the Bcdug land bridge into [hen onwunlto Europe and Africa. Ay five million years ago they had nearly all in Froncc :\nd Richard Owen io England improved clasl\ifica . tion with their metieulou< 'htdie.< of internal >S weU a.s external anatomies.. and tried 10 make sense wh:n lhe ultimate SOtltee or these patterned similarities cou.ld be. Not even Owen. a contemporary and oneti me friend of Darwin's in Life they had a b irtcr falling out). took the full step to an evolutionary v ision before The Origin r>fSperies wa.' published. Owen made a major mntribution. though, by advancing tbeconcept ofbomnloguc,,_ thai ;,, ;uperficially dill'erent but fundamentally similar ,..,rsions of a ;ingle organ or t.mit. shared by dissimilar species. Fnr the fi\•e·digil skeletal lUre of the vertebnuc hand appears nol just in humans and :.1pc.\ :md raccoon!) and l>et1N but a lso. variow:.ly modified. in curs and bats and poi\Cs and lizards and tunics.. The paired "")ncs of our lower kg, the tibia and the: libula. arc also rcp...,.,nted by bomologou.s in other mammoh and in reptiles. anc.l in the longoxtin(t hirrl-o·eptilc Arf'lweopreryx. What's the reason behind such V(lried rccun·cnce of a le w basic designs? Darwin. with a uod to Owen's "mosr interesting work," supplied the answer: common de.o;cent, shaped by natural selection, modifying the inh<-ritcd basics for different circumstances. ve...tigial an: slill anmhcr funn of cal evidence, illuminaling to contemplate rhey show George.-. Cuvier and Eaienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire or dbappeare that couldn ·, be explained by coincidence. Why docs the embo·yo or a mammal pass Lhrough stages resembling o r the embryo o f a repli le'! Why is ro•·. one of the larvrt.l forms of a barnacle:. before metamorphosis, larv:U fonn of a 'hrimp? Why do the larv:oe of M> ;imilar to the moths. flies. and beetles resemble one :wotber mott th.,n any of lhem resemble thctr respecti\-e adulh? Because, Darwin wrote. "tbc embryo is the unimal in its less modified stmc" and that stale "reveal' the strucLure of its progenitor." dle "very M01pbology. his founh categot')' of evidence, h in the 7 ANNUAL EDITIONS lhnt the living world is fuU of small, tolemblc imperfections. Why do male mammals (including human males) have nipples'! Why do some soakes (ootably boa consuictor<) corry the rudi· mcnt• of a pel vi• :and tiny legs buried inside their sleek profilc1.'1 Why do ccruin species of flightless beetle• have wing•. se:tled beneath wing cover.. that never open? Darwin rn•ut evolution. that is. He wasn' t right about Being a restless explainer. Darwin Oooted 3 num· her of theoretical notion> during his long working life, some of called Glen Roy. Most notably, his theory of inheritance-which he labeled pwlgcnc.,is and chetished despite its poor I'CCCplion amonl( his biologist colleagues-rumed out to be dead wmng. Fonunntcly J'o1' Darwin, the con·ectness or his most famou.' good idea stood indepcndenl nf thai particular bad idea. Evo- as they go. TI1eir inherent variability kill them. They evolve. There's no bcllcr or ITlOrc immcdime evidence suppon:ing the Darwiniun Lhcory than this of forced t.ransformatiou among our inimical germs. Take the common bacterium Stopltylorocc-us auT?us. which lurl;s in hospitals and eau""' .erious infections. especially scientjfic observation and careful thinking al it< be\1. Douglas f'utuyma i• a highly respected evolution:lt)' biolo among surgery patients. Penicillin. becoming available in 1943, pro•·ed almost mirnculou.sly cfl'ecli•e in fighting sl:lphylococ· cus infections. Its deploymenl m•rk•'t long. The first re.,istant strains of Slaphylococcu.< aureus were reported in 1947. A newer slaph-killing drug, methicillin. came into use during the 1960s. but n1cthicillin-resistaut strains appeared soon, aod by the 198(],; 1hosc were Vancomycin became Lhc next great against staph, ami the tirst vanoomycin-rcsistM I strain emerged in 2002. The.«: a." well as influential research p;.pcr":>. Hi< office, at the Univcl'l>ity of Michigan. is a long narrow room in the naturul ;cicnc:e,o, building, well stocked with and h<>o"-'. including volumes about the conllicl between creationevolution. I arrived CaJT);ng a well-thumbed copy vr his own book un that Mlbject. Scie11ct 011 Trio/: Tire Cau for Killing time in the <..-onidor before our I noticed" blue llycr on a departmental buUetin boa,·d, seeming oddly placed (ht:r¢ rhe announcements or carcc1· opportu· nit ics {Qr gr:.idualc students. ··creation vs. evolution." it S3id ...A seric..< (I)' messages challenging popular 1hough1 wilh DiblicaJ truth and -,cicntHic evidences.'· A traveling lecturer from \OOme·· antibiotic·rcs:istant SlrJins represent r.n evolutionary series, not much different in principle from the .-,.eries tracing horse e\'Olution from Hyrticmheriwn to Eq11uJ. They make evolution a very prnctic.1l problem by adding cxpcnM:. as "eU as misery and danger. to the challenge of coping with >tapll. 1be biologist Stephen P:llnmhi colculaled lhe cost of thing cu.lled the Origins ReseMch Association wnulc.J these """""$"' :1t a local Baptist chureh. Beside the lecturer'< photo o drawing of a pi7.7..a following tbe .,,·ening ,.crvicc.'' s:ud 3 >mall line at the bottom. Dino'-'!urs. biblical lruth, and piu.a: something for everybody. In n:spon:.c to my questions about evidence, Dr. l'uruyma moved quickly through the traditional categories-p:llcontology. lalkcd mostly about modem ACnetics. He pulled out hi10 them to lind new ways of evading aJld dcfcnrinn htumm immune systems. By natural selection they acquite rcsiswnce to d rugs Lhat should lution by n:uura) sc)ccliOD n:presented l)ai'Win :n ism or biomedical r'C.\.Carch SCCrll\ more urgent today capacity for quick change :tmong microbes is what makes them so dangeroua. co large numbers of people and :so difticuh and cxpc:nsivt: lQ trent. They leap from wildlife or Jon1e:o:;tic animals into humans. adnpting co new circumstances which were mistAken and illusory. He wrollg what vari:u ion within a species. He was wrong :.bout n f:unou."' geologic myMcry. lhe parallel shelves along a Scoui'h valley g.u"t. :lUiflOr or one devoted ro than the s1udy of microbial disca.cs. And the dynamics of those microbes within human bodie". within human populations. can only be understood in terms of e'•olution. Nightmarish illnesses caused by microbes include both the infectious son (AIDS. Ebola. SARS) that spread directly from person to person and the son (malaria. We:;t Nile fever) deli•-ered to us by biting insect\ or ocher intcnnediarics. The rnos1 recen1 ly. the whiz-bang field of machine-driven gc.nc.tic which is IU of the sequenced genome of the house mouse. Ml4s museu/ItS. The headline of the lead editorial announced: "HUMAN BIOLOGY BY PROXY:· The lll()USC genome eff011, according to Nature's editors, had revealed "aboul 30.000 genes. with 99% having direct in The resemblance between our 30,000 human genes and those 30.000 mousy counterpartS. l'utuyma explained, represents another form of homology. like the resemblance between a live-fingered hand and a live-toed paw. Such genetic homol· ugy what gives •ncaning to biomcc.JicoJ 1'csc.;1rch using mice and other ani mals, including chimpanzees, which (to their sad misfortune) are our closcsl living relatives. treating penicillin-n.-sistant and melhicillin-re.sistant staph infections. just in tbe United States. 3130 billion dollars a year. "Antibiotics exert a powerful evolutionary foree." he wrote year...driving bacrcrin ro evolve powerfuJ defenses against all but tlte mosl reccnLiy iovcnt..:d OJ·ugs:· reflected in tbelr DNA, which uses the same gcnc1ic code lhund in humans marked copy of the journal Nmun• for February 15,200 I, n historic issue, fat wilh articles reponing nnd t.ing rhe of the Human Genome I •rojcct . it he 8 Artic le 2. Was Da rwin Wrong? :md horses and hagfish and honeysuckle. bacteria are pan of the divergence between lineages about whicb Drdcd n speciation event, or very nearly so, in their cx1cndcd cxperimem on f111i1 flies. Frorn u small stock or ma1ed female.' thcy eventually produced IWO di\linct fly populalion> ad;tpted 10 different hnbit01 condilioo<. which tbe researcher.. judged "incipient species:· Afterrnyvisit with Douglas f utuymn inAnnArtmr, hpent two hours llt the university llluseum there with Philip D. Gingerich. a paleontologist well-known for his work on the ancesuy of As we talkec.l. Gingerich guided me through an exhibit of ancieol ce1aceon' on the museum'< scx:ond fl()()(. Amid weird ul whale evolulion. A burly man with a hmad open face and the gentle manner of a o;c<>ulnlaster. Ginecrich combines intcllccrual past: a willingnes.' to when he's wrong. Since the late 1970, Gingerich collecled fossil >pccirncns of early whnlcs f1·on1remote digs in l}gypt and PakisU.u1. WOI';king Wilh Pakisutni he discovered Pukicrtus. u continuum of life. all shaped ;ond diversified by evolutionary fOI'CCS. Even belong 10 that continuun1. Some viruses cvoJve quickly. some Amo1lg 1he fa."ttcst HIV. its method or replicating itself involves a high rate of mutation. and !hose murarions allow the viru.> 10 assume new fomt>. Aflcr just a few years of infeclion and drug trca11nem, each HJV a unique vel':-o ion of Lhe vinas. lsololiOn within one infected person. plus differing conditions and the struggle to survive. forc;e, each version or HIY to evolve independently. It's nOibing but a speeded up and microscopic ""'"' of wbat Darwin saw in the Galapagos-except that each human body is m1 island. and the newly evolved l'onns aren '1so channing as tlocbes or mockingbirds. Umle.rstanding bow quickly lilY acquires resist anile to antivita) drugs, such as AZT. bas been crucial 10 improving trcalmcnl by way of multiple drug cocktails. approach has reduced deoth.< due 10 IUY by severalfold since 1996." ing to Palurnbi. •·and jt has grcmly slowed Lhc cvolutioo of chis disease within p:.lticnts." Insects and weeds acquire rcsislance to our insecticides and herbicides through the same process. As we human.< try lo poison them. C\'Oiution by Mtur.tl selection transfonns the population of a mosqujto or thisrlc into :• new son of creature. le-.s ''tolnerablc to thai particular poison. So we invent tutother poison, then nnother. lt's a futileefl'<>o1. Even DDT, wi1 h it> ferocious and lcmg-lasling effects ecosystems. produced nics within a decade of its discO\·cry iu 1939. mammal duting rrom 50 million years ago. who:-.ccar By 1990 more than 500 species (includmg 114 kinds of mosquitoes) bad to nt least one pesticide. Based on these undesired resuhs, Stephen Pnlumbi has comrnenled gl umly, ''humans 111ay be lhe wol'ld 's Uomina•lf evolutionary force.'• bones rcOect its membership in the whllle lineage bul whose skull looks almost doglike. A former student of Gingerich's, Hans Thcwissen. fuund a slightly more recent form with webbed feet. legs suitabl&: for either or swinuning, and a tOOthy snout. ·n,cwissen called it Ambulocews 1w twa.\, re.._ist;rnt Among mosl of living ur the ''walking·tuld-swimming whulc.'' Qjn_gerich and his tcum rumed up sever.:tl more. induding Rodhoa:ws bn/(}(-hwhich was fully :a se-a creature. its legs more like evolution proc.ccd.s ;.lowly-100 slowly to be observed by a single scientist within a research tifetimc. But science functions by inference. not just by direct observntion, and the inferenlial w ns of evidence such as paleontology ;mel hiogcogl'aphy arc no less cogent sionply because 1hcy'rc indirect. Still , skeptic.< of evolmionary lhcory :lJ;k: Can evolution in acrion1 Can it be observed io the wild? Can it be measured in the labor.ttory? 111¢ answer i' yes. Peter nnd Ro.emary Gr.tnt. two Britishhom researchers who have spent where Charle.\ Darwin spent weeks, htovc CUI>tured a glimpse of evolution with their long-tenn studies of bc:lk size among Galapagos finches. William R. Rice and George W. Suit achieved something similar in their lab. thn>ugh an experiment io,•olving 35 generations of lhc fruit fly Drosophila mrltmoflu>ler. Richard E. l.cn,ki and his colleagues at Michigan Stale Urtiversity have done it too, tracking 20.000 generation' of evolution in the bac1crium Oippc". ib nostrils shined backward on the snout, h:llfway to the blowhole position on a modern whale. The sc<1ucnce of known forms becoming more :md more complete. And all alOll£. Gingerich tuld me, he leaned Inward believing thm whale.• had descended from group or carnivorous Eocene mammals known a< mcsonychids. wi1h check teem useful for chewing meat and bone. Just a bit more evidence, he lhoughl. would confirm that rcltotionsbip. Ry the end of the 1990s mo'r palconlologists agreed. Meanwhile. molecular biologiSis 1\(ld explored the same No. the match to que>tion and arri"cd lll a different those Eocene camh'Orc;. might be clO<;e. but not close enough. DNA hybridization nnd nther tuggestcd that whale' had dc. even-toed hert>i\'orcs, 'uch nnlclopus and hippos). not from Escherichia l'(j/i, Such tield sLudics and lab experiments document is. evolutionary chang..: withi n a mesonychi<.Js. In the ycar2000 chose a new field site in Puki>lan. where one of hi' \ tutlellls found a single piece of fossil that chang•-d the prevailing view in paleontology. ll was half of a pulley-shaped anklebone. known 3$ an nw:ogalu>. belonging to >ingle. unsplit lineage. \\r,th patience il can be seen, like thc nw,-ement of n minute band on a clock. Speciation, when a lineage splitS into IWO specie>. i> the other major phase of evolutionary change, mak.inA possible the another new species or whale. 9 ANNUAL EDITIONS A Pakistani colleague found the fragment's other half. When Gingerich filled the two pieces together, he had a moment of humbling recognition: The molecular biologistS were right. Here and was uot taughl

Tutor Answer

Drval
School: Carnegie Mellon University

...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Outstanding Job!!!!

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors