|
SE Nebraska | Yes, I read the whole story. Especially this part.
"For the skinks, moms in balmier climates may opt to conserve their own bodies' resources by depositing eggs on the ground for the final week or so of development. Moms in harsh mountain climates, by contrast, might find that it's more efficient to protect their young by keeping them longer inside their bodies."
So they produce eggs, and then some of they lay them on the ground, and others keep the eggs inside their bodies.
And this:
"The shells of these eggs thin dramatically so that the embryos can breathe, until live babies are born covered with only thin membranes—all that remains of the shells."
So, initially the eggs are the same for both skinks, but the shells of the eggs that remain inside the body get thinner before they are laid (birthed).
I don't think I would call this a true live birth, because the only difference is that the shell disappears, it's still inside an egg. And there is no placenta, which is normal for a mammal live birth.
So what happens if you take a mountain skink and bring them down to a warmer area. Reverse evolution?
I don't expect an animal to give birth to a different species. If I understand evolution correctly, that's how a species is supposed to become a different species over time. I've never seen this proven. Can you enlighten me.
I'm sure breeding has changed cows in the last 100 years, but they are still cows. Yes? And corn is still basically corn. Yes?
If the evidence is so visible, I must be blind. Can you post some evidence? | |
|
The "Noah" movie.......save your money
