>>99205424>a) you mean adaptionEvolution is a kind of adaptation. I was being more specific, since the mention was of inherited changes across generations, rather than other kinds of adaptation. For example, sweating in hot weather is an adaptation.
>b, c) that's in a highly controlled environmentIrrelevant to the point of how fast changes can rack up when they're consistently in one direction. Do you want a laundry list of examples of rapid evolution in nature in response to strong selective pressures?
>d) the magic in this children's cartoon has NEVER implied that it worked the wayBefore it happened, was there an implication that desecrating a stump would summon a spirit of vengeance? Besides that, you have the situation backwards. There are certain things that people have noticed in the show, and they have proposed this magic ability buildup to explain it. That's what an implication is.
>the way you are asspousing that it shouldI'm not espousing that. This is my second post of the thread. I just popped in to correct you on a biology point and question the relevance of real-world biology to magic in a children's cartoon. We don't have IDs in /co/, so try to keep in mind that different posts that disagree with you are not necessarily made by the same person.
