It's called "adaptation" and it's actually quite a good example of evolution at work.
From Wikipedia: "A biological adaptation is an anatomical structure, physiological process or behavioral trait of an organism that has evolved over a period of time by the process of natural selection such that it increases the expected long-term reproductive success of the organism. Organisms that are adapted to their environment are able to, among other things, defend themselves from their natural enemies."
'Changing' and 'blending' are examples of this evolved defense mechanism.
By the way, nature doesn't "know" anything. It isn't conscious, it isn't aware, it isn't willfull. It doesn't make choices and it doesn't have a mind to care how anything survives. Organisms adapt to the environment in which they must survive. It has nothing to do with nature "knowing" anything.
So you see... you've just admitted to the fact that animals have evolved and adapted and in the same breath insulted evolution. Try shooting yourself in the foot again... it's frightfully amusing.
2006-10-18 00:00:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
That's called natural selection. Here's an (hypothetically based) example:
Different varieties of a rats living in a snowy may have the same fur colour such as white, grey or black. At some point owls start to move into the region and eat the rats. The black rats stand out the most against the snow and most are picked off completely leaving only white and grey rats. Since there are no black rats to pass on genes, the rats loose a major disadvantage as a species.
Does that make sense to you?
2006-10-17 23:55:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
MOTHER NATURE DIDN'T KNOW SH*T. BUT THEIR PREDATORS KNEW WHICH ONES THEY COULD SEE TO HUNT. The ones that were best "camoflage" as you put it, were able to survive and reproduce. If you really want to understand evolution, read "On the Origin of Species" by Darwin, dont ask about it on a QA forum.
So this is how you debunk evolution???? You post some garbage two sentence thing about animals evolving their skin color and thats it, you are done and say "evolution sucks". I only wish you had the same feelings about your biggest unprovable theory "Christian fundamentalism".
And now u update asking how they got their camo??? Are you serious? We just explained it to you. if you aren't going totake the time to research the issue and only ask questions that you already have your mind made up on, how can you expect to like the answers you receive. maybe you should read something other than the bible
2006-10-17 23:50:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Professor Adjineri is incorrect returned. (he's somewhat a guy!) you do no longer could desire to have a scientific clarification for something in the previous you ought to use it. If it works, you ought to use it. The birds did no longer have an thought of flight, yet they flew. women persons did no longer comprehend what made cleansing soap do what it does (many nevertheless do no longer), yet they have been given their clothing sparkling besides. that's the version between a discovery and an invention. Darwin got here across what the animals and flora were doing by using time. He did no longer invent the phenomenon, he basically defined it in a manner that made extra experience than people who wrote in the previous, alongside with Lamarck.
2016-10-19 22:27:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It’s about survival of the fittest and it still happens today. There are albino animals that have a horrible chance of surviving because of their lack of camouflage.
Basically if you don't blend in with your surrounding than you either starve from unsuccessful hunts or get killed by sticking out.
If you die there is no way for you to pass your genes and overtime only the animals with best camouflage survive.
2006-10-17 23:52:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Reload 4
·
4⤊
0⤋
If you are so dense that you cannot understand "Natural Selection" (if you bothered to try at all) then you should find a decent source and do some reading. It's not that hard to understand. God Theory is what sucks. GOD THEORY - The accumulated myths and superstitions of your ancestors which have been dogmatized, institutionalized and mounded into the colossal pile of crap you call ultimate truth.
2006-10-18 02:34:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by iknowtruthismine 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Learn something about natural selection. You're calling evolutionists dumb? Mother nature didn't 'know' to give them camoflauge, nature isn't sentient. If you actually care to know the 'evolutionist' theory behind it, it was a gradual change in thier dna over a long period of time.
2006-10-18 00:01:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by Toxxikation 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Your question illustrates your massive ignorance. Try spending less time on these message boards and a little more time getting an education, otherwise you'll just be an embarrassing fool your whole life.
2006-10-18 00:17:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Once upon a time there was a Blind Christian who remained that way the rest of his life .
Evolution left him behind as an example of stupidity for the rest to see what could happen to us if we do not keep learning.
2006-10-18 00:01:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋
Charles Darwin's Own Admission
Finally, let us notice what Charles Darwin himself admitted about his own the theory of evolution.
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down" (Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, New York University Press, 6th ed., 1988, p. l54).
"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree" (Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, chapter: "Difficulties").
"Not one change of species into another is on record. we cannot prove that a single species has been changed" (Charles Darwin, My Life & Letters).
2006-10-18 00:10:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by His eyes are like flames 6
·
0⤊
3⤋