Talk:Cladogenesis
Daily page views
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
Aren't the theoretical processes of Cladogenesis virtually identical to the theoretical processes of Anagenesis, regardless of the varied outcomes due to differences in habitats? Of course, both theories are merely far-fetched hypotheses. But inasmuch as, "Anagenesis is the straw man Creationists like to attack but that is not how it occurs." <David Rosen, PhD Physics & Solid State, City University of New York Graduate Center (1985)> the non-distinct nature of said processes seems curious in tis context!
So I was just considering some information that could be added to this page, such as how scientists possibly go about determining whether something falls under the category of Cladogenesis? Like the use of observations (certain selected physical characteristics of the clade being observed), molecular genetic data, or even fossil records of already extinct organisms, because it can be used to determine when new organisms were introduced to the environment and whether or not they overlapped for a period of time. Maybe the section could be titled "Methods"? Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthur.181 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
History of the Relevance of Clades in Theory
[Should there be a section titled something like this? If so, might it include some of the following material, from the article on the History of evolutionary thought:] One of the tenets of the
Any thoughts? Anyone? Bob Enyart, Denver radio host at KGOV (talk) 00:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
References
- )
- doi:10.1002/1097-010X(20001215)288:4<304::AID-JEZ3>3.0.CO;2-G.)
{{cite journal}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help - )