>>12968884>how is common ancestors controversial? All evolution is governed by the same basic principle as I have laid out the before. The basic principle is the same, just things get less obvious and less predictable as more time passes by.
Populations migrate in space over time in search of better conditions, and end up in different locations that have different conditions. They may even split in search of these locations, and become 2 different populations that can further evolve separately.
Populations in these different locations can become completely different in terms of their traits simply because they evolve to adapt to different environments.
Meanwhile, different populations also compete with each other for limited resources found in any location they are in, which can cause certain populations to migrate even more to different places which may not be better in terms of resources, but be better in terms of competition.
After a while (many generations - think on the order of tens, hundreds, or even thousands) - any individuals drawn randomly from these different populations may be radically different, while still having a common ancestor all those generations ago. They just evolved differently since then.
>natural selection is enough to explain single cell organisms "evolving" into human life. This is absolutely absurdJust because you cant wrap your head around it doesnt mean it is not possible of it is wrong. It just means that you dont understand how it can be, nothing more
Also, this (vwith VERY conservative numbers)
>>12968948Also, evolution is very nonlinear (as mentioned by me in this post, as well as by many others in their posts). See my pic related, maybe it will help understand better.
