I was specifically addressing your question about dead animals evolving.
So does this mean that, technically, we share cells that dinosaurs had (or something else from that era) because there is a long direct line of births from animals that were around 65 million years ago?
Wooo woo there buddy, we aren't scientists here. These questions are too much. Too inquisitive, too advanced. My brain hurts. Don't do this to us.
Evolution is just the passing of genes. Think about it. Dog breeds were made selecting which dogs would have offspring. They selected muscular females and males, or slender females and males, or females and males with spots, and over time these genes would become more dominant in each generation, until you have a generation where all dogs are muscular, or slender, or spotted.
Yes but which environmental factors caused domesticated wolves thousands of years ago to slowly evolve into the chihuahuas we have today?
I'm not 100% wolves became dogs, but they do have a lot in common. So, bazillions of years ago those wolves that were slightly less aggressive figured out that wherever there were people there was food. Those people figured out where these wolves followed them around they had a warning system. Wolves, in the wild, only live something like 5 years. Wolves that hang around people lived longer because food was more reliable, and they didn't have to fight for it, or expend energy hunting. Wolves that were too aggressive were kicked out of the human herd or killed, that's how the friendly genes were selected.
Since all species are thought to have been born from a common ancestor, didn't little dogs like the chihuahua eventually evolve from wolves tho?
Evolution never stops. It's a constant process, even today.
It's ok
How can they genetically sequence say, a dolphin, if each dolphin has different individual DNA?
Kinda like males make more sperm than needed. I mean, millions go unused. That's basically a waste but it still happens.
So every animal born is slightly (very very slightly) different to other animals of its species. Sometimes the difference is useful in survival and sometime it is not. The animals born with the mire useful traits naturally have more success at survival and as a result produce offspring with the same trait where the others die off without reproducing so prominently. Its a very slow process due to the very small variables. There is no choice in its changes. They're chance mutations. Much like you see in a virus mutation. The environment shapes them and is a big factor whether they survive and thrive. It is all down to chance. In the case of pets however this is not how it works. Humans step in to speed up and influence the process. So many dogs kept as pets would be unlikely to exist or occur in natural selection/evolution. They have been chosen by breeders who look for desired traits and then breed them intensively. This too is done with much of our agricultural produce. Tomatoes were never naturally the size we're used to now. They were tiny things. Carrots weren't orange. They were purple. Humans have stepped in and changed many things that nature wouldn't have done and in so doing have proved the theories or evolution to be true.
For the human genome, they actualy seqenced several different people and averaged them out, using that as a sort of template for reference. I imagine the same would be done for a dolphin, or any other animal, plant, etc.It's ok
How can they genetically sequence say, a dolphin, if each dolphin has different individual DNA?
It's like your DNA is different to mine, right?
