Cyracuz wrote:heph
I don't understand the question.
Why are you not a man? Why am I not a woman?
It's really not that difficult a question to understand though. The key word is WHY.
megamanXplosion wrote:Blue Jays aren't really blue. It is the reflected wavelengths of light that make them look blue. You can grind some features up and not get a blue powder. You can also hold the features up between you and a light source and the blue will go away. Small particles in the feathers cause that refraction of light. In many respects, the explanation for why a blue jay is blue is similar to why the sky is blue: it is all a trick of light.
Parrots aren't really green either. They also have small particles like the blue jays. They have a layer of particles that scatter blue and a layer of particles that scatter yellow, causing them to look green.
I know that is not the kind of answer you're looking for. I just felt like talking a little bit Wink
As for your actual question of why they've come to be the way they are, I have no idea. I did a search on Google Scholar and I kept being fed a bunch of links to research concerning warning coloration in insects that effected the behavior of blue jays and how the blue jays come to realize certain colors are bad to for their diets. (One actually shown a picture of a Blue Jay throwing up the insect, lol.) The question you've posed is an interesting one though. Considering that I see bluejays all the time, I'm surprised I've never thought about the question before. Now the question is going to bug the crap out of me Razz
If anyone knows the answer, we would appreciate it if you enlighten us Smile
Now THAT... was an awesome answer! Had nothing to do with the question but wow that was some interesting stuff mega!
Cyracuz wrote:It is blue becuase it can be. We are the way we are because we can be. The seamless interplay of forces create a delicate balance in which everything recieves it's attributes from it's own potential and the limits set by it's environment.
Errrr... That answer equates to the value of the common "christian" answer of... "well... because I believe in faith..."
megamanXplosion wrote:When you find an actual answer to Hep's question, feel free to share it. I'm sure Hep and I both agree that the response quoted above does not answer Hep's question.
Yep we sure do.
Cyracuz wrote:You mean "Why is a bluejay blue?". That question?
It strikes me as a useless question in the same category as "why is water wet".
Ummm well... Cyracuz... it's not useless really. It's actually a very valid question I think.
maporsche wrote:Are they asking why a bluejay would have evolved to be blue and not purple instead?
I'm not asking anything about "evolving" of any sort at this point. I am simply asking WHY. Science can explain how we "evolved" right? So surely it can answer as simple a question as this don't you think?
Cyracuz wrote:As far as I can tell.
The only answer I can come up with is obvious: It was practical. This worked, so this bird got to pass on it's genes. If purple was a more suited color, then they'd be purple. Obvious.
It was practical to whom? Because for it to be "practical" wouldn't there have needed to be someone to whom it was "practical" to make the bluejay blue? And if it was practical to "someone"... well who was that someone? Who made that decision?
Could it be...
Perhaps...
God?
Eorl wrote:This was the question you asked first, before the distracting bluejay question (which is actually a good question to be asking, especially when compared to this question above)
Do you have a link to the first time you asked about the bluejay, hep?
I seem to remember posting a very good site that discussed bird colouration and adaptation....which I doubt you spent much time reading.
Here's your link Eorl:
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=78974&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
And here's YOUR words to my question last time:
Eorl wrote:
There is a very good reason why bluejays are blue and science can answer the question. Not how....why.
You seem to have this wilful determination to dismiss science, yet you seem to understand so little about it. Why is that?
To which you never replied again.
*sigh*
It's not a distraction Eorl. I'm trying to prove a point here. Did you get it yet?
Well I really would like to know why a bluejay is blue though.
Cyracuz wrote:Evolution is a matter of mutations. If one gorilla among many has a mutation that gives it an edge, and is able to pass on that mutation genetically, evolution has happened. But that doesn't mean that all the 'old model' gorillas just fade away. If they can sustain their existence there will only be two species of gorilla rather than one.
But I suspect that the evolution of man has gone on for far longer than the evolution of gorilla. At one time man might have looked a lot like gorilla does today. At that time gorilla may have looked like something else entirely.
Human is the oldest form of primate we know of, and therefore the most advanced.
If human is the oldest form of primate, did the gorilla then evolve from us? Does science have this backwards?