• intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Less evolved as in the product of less evolution. There is such a thing as more and less because more happens over time.

    • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Ok, but evolution doesn’t follow a straight path. The ancestors of whales looked like wolves, while whales look, act, and function much more like fish, which those wolf-like pre-whales evolved from way earlier up the line. This is a common misconception about evolution, so don’t feel bad for getting caught in it.

    • Crankenstein@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      To have “more or less” of something implies the effectiveness of the product is directly caused by the metric being measured.

      The amount of time a genotype took to evolve has no bearing on the effectiveness.

      There is no such thing as “more/less evolved”. There is no gradient. Something either is evolved to adapt to its environment or it isn’t.

      • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 minutes ago

        I’m not disagreeing with you here, but wouldn’t it be fair to say there is a gradient, but it is dynamic and defined by the current environment and what it takes to survive it?

        Maybe the goal posta keep moving but we are talking about a very large time scale, so long that, for at least a couple of million years, what could be defined as more or less evolved might seem or be descibed as pretty solid.

        Although i suppose its not fair to say more or less evolved and might be more accurate to say more or less well adapted.