Develops a poisonous skin so animals leave it alone

>HUURRRRR EVOLUTION WORK AT THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL DUUUUUUUUUUUURR
That's you.

>Lots of creatures kill you
Fewer is better
>if you are dead you wont pass on your poison genes
If your genes have already been passed on your death can still aid in the furtherance of those genes.

>1 predator vs 100 unpoisoned frogs
>predator eats all frogs, moves on to location with more frogs to eat
>score: 100-0
>0 surviving frogs

>1 predator vs 100 frogs with poison
>predator eats 1 frog and instantly dies
>score: 1-1
>99 surviving frogs

Next you're going to tell us it's stupid for bees to sting people because they die in the process and can't pass on their genes.

A strategy that doesnt require suicide will be more successful than one that does, which is what happened in real life

Also - there are other species with similar colours which don't seem to be poisonous.

Most animals that are poisonous to eat are brightly colored so that predators that have eaten one, know not to do so again (and in the higher predators, teach their young to avoid them as well.) Most are not fatal, and just make the animal sick as fuck.

This is particularly effective with avian predators, who have insanely acute color vision.

>individual death = species extinction

Well, the bees that die when they sting can't pass on their genes anyways. Drones don't sting.

Still think the wasps were onto something there though.

...

kek... (Though is ignoring the fact that flowers are so colored for the exact opposite reason.)

>Next you're going to tell us it's stupid for bees to sting people because they die in the process and can't pass on their genes.
The bees that sting things dont reproduce anyway so it doesnt matter

Yeah I was just realizing that.
I guess I should go back to /pol/.

Why ?

This is what we call evolutionary cheating.

Evolution works on the level of the individual you moron, the eusocial insects are the only real exception

>A strategy that doesnt require suicide will be more successful than one that does
It's not suicide really, that's the wrong choice of word.
The two aren't mutually exclusive either and the bright colours would probably be a detriment on their own unless the frog were aping something else that was similar and poisonous.
The colours work because they're associated with poison and the poison works for reasons outlined above.

>Evolution works on the level of the individual you moron
What did he mean by this?

Individual adaptations also affect the species as a whole. Overlapping species with interacting adaptations are also a thing. It'd be more accurate to say it works based on the environment, operating through a series of individuals.

Otherwise, you wouldn't get things like mammalian communication, herd defense, pack hunting, and the like.

Birds are also brightly colored to attract mates. Bright colors do not always mean "poisonous"

>It's not suicide really, that's the wrong choice of word
Fair enough, i'll concede that.>The two aren't mutually exclusive either and the bright colours would probably be a detriment on their own
Yes of course, I wasnt denying that. OPs point seems to imply that the bright colours doesnt make sense as a strategy when clearly it does, seeing as even non-poisonous animals use it. Clearly the threat of poison is in some circumstances a better strategy than camouflage, even when its not backed up by actual poison

Do you understand evolution at all?

Uh, carelessly posting other peoples' stuff without any fact-checking? It's a bad habit.
Also it's been pretty fun over there, they got a cool DoD exercise, manipulating dubs to make us believe an ancient egyptian god of darkness and chaos is being manifested through pepe, and the thing we're all working for is getting Trump elected, fighting the forces of the child-sacrifice gods that back Hillary and the central banking cabal. We literally have Pepe on CNN and hillaryclintondootcom. Look up the Minerva initiative, if you're interested. Me, I'll be making Pepes for the Lord of Light.

Well, it is nearly always for identification purposes.

>And SJW's are poisonous as fuck

no its more intelligent

I don't see how flowers being brightly colored destroy the concept of aposematism.
What next, ur mum having taken the cock of every male, human or not, of the planet in her vagina destroy underwater basket weaving ?

No idea.

An adaptation must increase the odds of the gene responsible for that adaptation being passed on or it wont spread. In practice the overwhelming majority of the time this means increasing the odds of the individual carrying that gene having children who survive to have their own children.

Thats what I meant by "works on the level of the individual"

extremely doubtful an animal is intelligent enough to even comprehend warning signs about diseased skin

>I wasnt denying that.
Sorry, i must have misunderstood. I agree with what you've said.

Thing is, I've had my innocence scarred by a careless selfish woman. I find myself drawn to these magenta-headed harlots, but I know they will only hurt me, so I begin to dislike them. I know my personal bias will affect what I post, and science isn't about feelings. Even if the truth hurts, you have to admit it. That's Veeky Forums.

But that individual's survival can be enhanced by any number of external factors, including the creation of a society among his fellow species, and even symbiosis with other species not genetically compatible with one another.

The insect hive evolution happened in very much the same way the mammalian social evolution happened. The individual may transmit the genes, but it's the species that evolves, as the collective in turn improves the survival rate of the individuals within it.

>extremely doubtful an animal is intelligent enough to even comprehend warning signs about diseased skin
I don't know what to say other than they are, even insects understand such things at some level.

I don't see what's emotional about extreme misoginy.
Sure, personal experience may push yourself to hating women, but only factual truth and Historical study can turn you to wish to slaughter all women and replace them with the artificial womb for securing Humanity's future.

Hatred born out of the Truth, of facts and statistics, is much more cold and so profound and not easily swayed than emotional hatred.

Maybe not comprehend sapiently, but predators do avoid clearly diseased animals, when they aren't starving, and will even react in fear to sufficient deformity.

...Not sure what that has to do with brightly colored poisonous frogs, but the mechanisms are likely not dissimilar - save among those few poor instances where they learn by a near fatal experience.

its so animals SEE it and realize that its poisonous.

otherwise they would just eat it and both die.

Crows in Australia have learnt to flip over cane toads to avoid poison glands, and they haven't even lived together for 100 years yet.

>extremely doubtful an animal is intelligent enough to even comprehend warning signs about diseased skin
Really? That's not a terribly difficult task.

Crows are smart as fuck though.

Yea, maybe it would take longer for other predators to recognise the association between species with poison and the development of an aversion towards their appearance/smell whatever. Especially when the feature was first evolving, as opposed to the abrupt introduction of cane toads to Australian ecosystems.

>The insect hive evolution happened in very much the same way the mammalian social evolution happened
Not really. Mammalian social groups developed because each memebr of the group has an their fitness increased by membership on average. Eusocial insects by contrast involve the majority of individuals giving up their personal chance of success entirely in favour of increasing the odds of their relatives success. It works because your siblings and parents are as related to you as your own children

Are you seriously fucking retarded? Drink bleach we don't need your dumbass genes being passed down to future generations.

are you fucking retarded

animals learn from experience, or dont learn i.e. are predated upon

i have seen fish populations shy away from researchers for 2 generations due to experiments in-field in one area, only relenting when the family wasnt targeted in that area for a decade

>but duhh fish are dumb lol

fucking brainlets

its called mimicry, much like your mimicry of a person that didnt pick up an extra chromosome on the way to work this morning

Is knowing the colorful frogs are poisonous genetic? How did it aid in evolution during the beginning when animals didn't associate the colors to poison?

dumb frogposter

Sorry, I couldn't resist

The drones you find out gathering pollen and shit are females.

Males are kept in the hive and used as cum machines. Then killed.

animals can learn from observation just like humans - i am a crane, i was born in a nest of 12 cranes, one of my siblings ate a weird coloured frog and promptly died; i am capable of remembering this, if not through actual remembering, through passive imprinting.

vestigial memory is also (most likely) a thing

the frog that is eaten is enhancing the survivorship of its species by dying. passing on the genes of the individual is the primary goal, however failing that, the secondary goal is enhancing the survivorship of the population

ecological 'fitness' is defined as; in some way enhancing the survivorship of your offspring. if this frog has already reproduced, and a crane eats him, he has contributed to the fitness of his species (And his individual genome, if his progeny have survived)

...

>replys with insults
>still cant prove the origins of life
>believes animals develop poison because of being preyed upon
>evolution

You are retarded.

>Drones are not workers
>Drones are males
>Drones aren't kept in the hive, they are often forced out after a certain time and go to find some virgin queens.

Yeah, lol a smart frog would have chosen to evolve high camo skill fucking retards