To conclude the above discussion by example I thought I would throw this one in as a seperate post and choose a rather interesting criteria for evolution being genome size.

Look at the data

I will exclude the 670Gb of the Amoeboid because that is disputed.

So the most evolutionary advanced animal using that criteria is the marbled lungfish at a whopping 130Gb and the most evolved plant is the Japanese-native, pale-petal at 150Gb.

I would need ImagingGeek to explain what the hell that DNA much is needed for, I guess alot of it is junk.

If you think that is a fair criteria there is an obvious flaw in it and it comes up in the entry that things with this length DNA replicate very slowly because it takes a very very long time to replicate that ammount of DNA. I suspect that gives you a clue under my energetics definition why these organisms have been successful because they are doing an interesting form of regulation that may prove successful in some instances.

Anyhow there is nothing wrong with that evolutionary order and under it humans arent very evolved (which may irk some people), its just a different observer point than the one I selected which is change in organism energetics thru time.

Last edited by Orac; 03/13/13 01:36 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.