The Stickleback Fish
🪫 One example that evolutionists have started promoting to support the myth is the stickleback , or the stickleback fish ,
because it changes morphologically, such as changing the number of shields, size, etc.;
But in fact, it is like the change in the shapes of the beaks of the Galapagos Islands,
which we previously proved was responsible for the protein Calmodulin ,
which is responsible for changing the length of the beak,
and the protein BMP4 (Bone Morphogenetic Protein 4) ,
which is responsible for the change in fish.
In the end, it was not evolution,
but rather the change due to proteins that already existed.
The same thing was proven in the stickleback fish,
where researchers found that it selects new adaptations —
in other words: new adjustments to mechanisms based on pre-existing traits,
which researchers called SGV (Standing Genetic Variation) —
in other words: it is the genetic diversity already available in the genome before any environmental changes occur.
📱 I will give you an example to clarify:
The light sensor of the phone — when you stand at night in an area with high light,
it raises the lighting to the highest possible brightness;
but if the power is suddenly cut off,
the sensor will reset the brightness based on a pre-programmed setting
that enables it to automatically adjust to lower the brightness.
- “Vertebrate populations frequently harbor large reservoirs of standing genetic variation (SGV)”
🪫 Translation: Vertebrate populations frequently harbor large reservoirs of standing genetic variation (SGV).
📎 Here is a link to a detailed study of what happened:
📎 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abg5285
🪫 But beware of evolutionary deceptions,
because you will find that they try to explain it out of their bag with funny patchwork,
such as that it was prepared for millions of years by natural selection,
or that it is evidence of evolution…
Imagine — after all this — they still insist that this is evolution,
as stated in the study: “The importance of SGV for evolution is becoming increasingly apparent.”
You have proven that it is due to traits that already exist — but change —
so why do you still cling to evolution to be crammed into anything?!!
🪫 What’s even funnier is that these same fish were promoted by some as evidence of the ability of evo devo developmental biology mechanisms to develop new species and achieve a kind of rapid evolution,
So Jerry Coyne himself, a famous evolutionary advocate, criticized them as a case of loss of traits , not creation of new ones.
🪫 The best case involves the loss of protective armor and spines in sticklebacks,
both due to changes in regulatory elements.
But these examples represent the loss of traits ,
rather than the origin of evolutionary novelties.
📎 https://www.nature.com/articles/4351029a
{Embed}
https://www.nature.com/articles/4351029a
Switching on evolution
Nature - How does evo–devo explain the huge diversity of life on Earth?
