Sir, thank you. Specifically for: 1) getting straight to the most relevant points 2) treating us as intelligent by speaking normally Liked, subbed, shared and will continue to share. Peace out to you too.
I've been scanning the internet trying to find a clear definition of punctuated equilibrium and you literally explained what most authors do in 50 pages in 30 seconds. Thank you!
The two theories aren't in conflict. Both are true. Transitional forms aren't always found because fossilization is a rare occurrence within any particular species at any particular time in their evolution. Fossils aren't even necessary as we can see in living species the slightly transitional forms. GGL ring species.
Punctuated equilibrium seems to me more correct because according to gradualism a) we shouldn't have "living fossil" organisms today and b) we will have seen far more transitional forms both in the fossil record and in the nature.
There is no %100 certainty in biology.Both theories are correct in case of their situations.But we can say maybe more than half of creatures evolved with " punctuated equilibra".
Basically I was joking. I don't believe in evolution. Neither did Gould or Eldredge. I mean come on! They said it "We didn't find proof of evolution so evolution happened.." seriously? That's not science period.
@@Lonewolf-ei5yv good pun! These scientists cant explain where the big bang came from or what effected it (basically what was before it) neither how species developed yet they act like science was the answer to everything
Just as curiosity. Oswald Spengler, philosopher of history, had stated in his books *[1]* , natural evolution as a sudden process (same as PE thesis), just by observing and interpretating the phaenomena of every event in nature, as fosil or geological records. In that sense, he argue that mankind's history (as specie and Universal History) can be studied as a biological organic process: with phases of birth, growth, aging and death. Also, he says that this fact shorten the length of the ages (dated in million of years) to a lot lesser account. This thesis clearly has a teleological component, but we can't achieve the knowledge of what is the _a priori_ "mision" of Life for the living forms. The purpose of Life is in itself? *[1]* The Decline of the West (1918-1923); Man and Technics" (1931)
"Magic?" No, it's mostly an issue of the speed of environmental change (including the appearance or disappearance of other species) coupled with the degree of isolation of sub-populations. The greater the speed of environmental change, the higher the evolutionary pressure; the greater the isolation of sub-populations, the greater the chance that variants will become new sub-species and in the end perhaps fully speciate.
punctuated equilibrium is right to me. It is like one species just kill off most of the members of another specie, and consume the resources of the extinct specie? That would explain this idea.
What you're describing seems to be the biotic interaction competition. Both of these version of evolution are more to do with changes in a population and a new species resulting from those changes. Gradualism the changes accumulate slowly. Where as, in punctuated equilibrium the changes go through cycles of rapid change and relative stasis.
Fishes is correct when you talking about multiple species.... You only use fish as a plural when you taking about many fish of the same species.... So yes, his English is spot on
Sir, thank you.
Specifically for:
1) getting straight to the most relevant points
2) treating us as intelligent by speaking normally
Liked, subbed, shared and will continue to share.
Peace out to you too.
I've been scanning the internet trying to find a clear definition of punctuated equilibrium and you literally explained what most authors do in 50 pages in 30 seconds. Thank you!
thanks dude, in 4 minutes and a half you explained like 4 hours of reading XD
Thank you Mr Catterson
The two theories aren't in conflict. Both are true. Transitional forms aren't always found because fossilization is a rare occurrence within any particular species at any particular time in their evolution. Fossils aren't even necessary as we can see in living species the slightly transitional forms. GGL ring species.
Punctuated equilibrium seems to me more correct because according to gradualism a) we shouldn't have "living fossil" organisms today and b) we will have seen far more transitional forms both in the fossil record and in the nature.
There is no %100 certainty in biology.Both theories are correct in case of their situations.But we can say maybe more than half of creatures evolved with " punctuated equilibra".
Basically I was joking. I don't believe in evolution. Neither did Gould or Eldredge. I mean come on! They said it "We didn't find proof of evolution so evolution happened.." seriously? That's not science period.
@@Lonewolf-ei5yv good pun! These scientists cant explain where the big bang came from or what effected it (basically what was before it) neither how species developed yet they act like science was the answer to everything
Great video! Thanks!
Thank you it ws good nd brief
THANK YOU YOU HELPED ME ON MY TEST ON PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM VS GRADUALISM FOR A RETARD THANKYOU THANKYOU AUSTRALIAN MAN BAE IN 2020 LUCA ARSE
U r goooood teacher
Thanks for the feedback.
Just as curiosity. Oswald Spengler, philosopher of history, had stated in his books *[1]* , natural evolution as a sudden process (same as PE thesis), just by observing and interpretating the phaenomena of every event in nature, as fosil or geological records. In that sense, he argue that mankind's history (as specie and Universal History) can be studied as a biological organic process: with phases of birth, growth, aging and death. Also, he says that this fact shorten the length of the ages (dated in million of years) to a lot lesser account.
This thesis clearly has a teleological component, but we can't achieve the knowledge of what is the _a priori_ "mision" of Life for the living forms. The purpose of Life is in itself?
*[1]* The Decline of the West (1918-1923); Man and Technics" (1931)
thank you so much
THANK YOU SO MUCH! You helped me study!
Thanks
Both are true, you know. Sometimes evolution proceeds by gradual steps, and sometimes dramatic ones.
I guess magic is the key
"Magic?" No, it's mostly an issue of the speed of environmental change (including the appearance or disappearance of other species) coupled with the degree of isolation of sub-populations. The greater the speed of environmental change, the higher the evolutionary pressure; the greater the isolation of sub-populations, the greater the chance that variants will become new sub-species and in the end perhaps fully speciate.
cheers
punctuated equilibrium is right to me. It is like one species just kill off most of the members of another specie, and consume the resources of the extinct specie? That would explain this idea.
What you're describing seems to be the biotic interaction competition. Both of these version of evolution are more to do with changes in a population and a new species resulting from those changes. Gradualism the changes accumulate slowly. Where as, in punctuated equilibrium the changes go through cycles of rapid change and relative stasis.
1:14 Not sure if I want to trust anything this guys says about biology now. "fishes"...
To clarify; "Fishes" refers to a number of different species of fish.
@@MrCattersonScience so fishes don't exist in English but exist in biology? ☺️☺️
@@lebogangsedibe473 In certain circumstances, I guess so.
It's a double plural
@@abdulraheemmalik9873 Pretty sure it should just be "types of fish".
Fishes 😂😂 English spot on
Fishes is correct when you talking about multiple species.... You only use fish as a plural when you taking about many fish of the same species.... So yes, his English is spot on
fishes will be added to english dictionary sometime in the future.
FISHES