how do darwinians explain how butterflies could evolve ?

Question

the life cycle is caterpillar to chrysalis to butterfly...inside the cocoon the caterpillar totally disolves etc and I cant see how it could evolve...this is a real question purely through interest and it's a good question

Answer 1

Butterflies are insects. Many insects go through a similar life cycle. Bees for example, are raised as grubs that spin a basic cocoon within the wax cells that are produced by the adult bee colony.
Maggots turn into flies having gone through a similar process without the wax comb.

Its a much smaller step from fly larva to butterfly larva. and hence from fly to butterfly.

Answer 2

The mistake is in thinking it all had to happen in one go. Insect species differentiated over thousands of years. Most likely, this was achieved by a number of mutations.

Many insects have a metamorphosis phase - house flies from maggots for example.

The question to ask is - what environmental factors drove the butterfly to mutate and develop the lifecycle we see today.

It's true that we don't yet know what factors forced this particular change - but lack of evidence isn't a reason to jump to the conclusion that some higher power was involved.

Many things that seemed impossible to explain have turned out to have rational explanations once we fully understood the science. We no longer burn people at the stake for saying that the earth goes around the sun; and we understand that the eclipse is simply a shadow, and not the wrath of an angry god.

See the article I've linked below for more information.

Answer 3

Science may not be able to explain every step of every stage of every animal, and this is seen by creationists as proof that evolution is incorrect. Darwin never claimed to have all the answers, neither do scientists today make that claim, but the theory of evolution is too compelling and logical to be simply dismissed just because it carries the tag of "Theory". There are many current examples of the theory at work, including bacterial resistance to medication, locust resistance to pesticides etc.

The fact remains that each stage of the butterfly's life cycle is suited to its requirement at that time. Caterpillars are suited to remaining in one place and eating, but diversifying the species required it to spread its wings, so to speak. All insects have different life cycles in a similar way. Wings probably evolved at a later stage in order to escape predators or to increase chances of finding a mate. They have had about 400 million years of evolution. What the creationists cannot explain is why the different stages exist, why not just create a butterfly which pops out of the egg as a butterfly?

The links below give a timeline of insect evolution. Remember, evolution is very, very slow, and is caused by minor random mutations which just happen to give the "mutant" a better chance of survival than his/her fellow insects.

Hope this helps.

Answer 4

Evolution is a natural change in the life process. At some point, not necessarily in the cocoon, a change will occur in the design of the caterpillar. It begins in the genes (DNA) and that is the basis of all beginnings of life. Everything starts out as a DNA sequence to design what it grows into. We have evolved from fish to land animals. And humans are genetically closer in DNA to monkeys than rats are to mice.

Answer 5

I lolled till at last my aspects chop up. the 1st line became the funniest if Im straightforward. "creation scientist?" do no longer make me chuckle. before everything the only "evidence" that a creationist will ever arise with is the disproof of yet another concept as there is not any scientific way finding out their hypothesis. I could say it irritates me whilst human beings needless to say dont comprehend the evolutionary technique. Evolution does no longer say some thing rapidly changes into some thing else as many creationists have self belief. it rather is amazingly small consecutive changes over an prolonged term. human beings say the attention cant be defined in evolutionary words because of the fact they suspect 5% of a watch woud be no sturdy, do you no longer agree if working example that 5% might desire to enable you tell the version between easy and darkish could that no longer be an benefit? It additionally gets me whilst human beings dont comprehend fossilization. it rather is an exceedingly uncommon technique with many situations that would desire to be purely appropriate for it to take place. we are no longer likely to discover each and every evolutionary step in lifes historic previous because of the fact no longer each and every thing became in a position to be fossiized. and how do religous human beings settle for fossils are actual isnt the worldwide purely meant to be 6000 years previous? Species dont have a reason to evolve it purely happens as consequence of the selectuve pressures that have been around on the time. A species doesnt come to a determination to evolve it purely does. in actuality we cant pass decrease back in time an see what the situations have been like so we could constantly make the terrific wager. I asked this question till now and have been given some sturdy reponses why are creationists allowed to apply the argument "in case you cant see it didnt exist" yet then use the different to coach gods existance. That to me as I pronounced in the previous is hypocrisy. additionally why did he p.c.. butter and butterfly? purely because of the fact the call is alike? why did he no longer p.c.. 2 closly appropriate species and discover motives for them to diverge? is that because of the fact he might desire to in all probability detect a reason? This scientist is loopy, butter doesnt reproduce it purely is composed of the DNA left over from whilst the cow made the milk. between the essential innovations of evolution is the flexibility reproduce butter doesnt have that ability thats why we dont see tubs of margerine mating.

Answer 6

I don't know how this life cycle evolved but it did!
Darwinians? You make it sound like we are some kind of religious cult! As far as I understand it, it is those who believe in some Intelligent Design that belong to a religious cult.
The unknown is unexplainable too but just using a "God" to explain it is even worse than not trying to find out
Ignorance is a lack of knowledge but blind faith is a lack of intelligence

Answer 7

Turning into a butterfly is not evolution. It is a stage change.

Answer 8

I don't know,but i think the original name,flutterby,is best.

Answer 9

The truth is- they cannot explain it, as they cannot explain a lot of things. Darwin purely "left out" animals that he could not comfortably fit into his theory. Which is why it remains purely a THEORY.

Personally I think it's all utter tripe, try looking on google for some sites on anti-Darwinism- it'll probably fascinate you and convert you to the dark side lol!

Humans from Monkeys- you have to be taking the p"ss Darwin!

Answer 10

www.darwinonline.com has the answer..MAYBE ?