A better question is how it would not transfer.

>>7663606
I'm saying, give me a logically answer so I can better explain it to her. How does this happen genetically? I know kids can pretty much pick up what their parents show them pretty fast(In contrast to how long the human life is), but how does these changes impact the genetics of a human having a baby?

>>7663614

You're thinking about it backwards. The mutation happens randomly, and most mutations are harmful. Occasionally a mutation happens that happens to promote survival. It doesn't happen in response to behavior or environment. Then, the actual evolution (that is, the mutation becoming ubiquitous in the population) occurs as a consequence of luck and because those with the mutation can survive better and therefore are more likely to have children (because dead people can't have children.)

>>7663614
>Basically she asked me, how does natural adaption correlate with genetics. Like I get over a period of time a common human ancestor stood up, because it was necessary to survive, but how did this transfer to his children and his children's children. It was a simple question that had me stomped.

I just searched some keywords on youtube. I don't have my sound on so I don't know how good these are desu but hopefully they cover the question

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR3779ef9yQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwibgNGe4aY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYOK-yzUWSI

>>7663602
Ignore these faggots OP. What you're forgetting is there's 2 parts to the theory:

!) The Theory of Evolution by Genetic Mutations

2 The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection

Within all species there are variations. Not at first, but over time, due to environment, diet, climate etc Mutations happen. Some grow tall, some short, some fast, some slow, some white, some black etc You get the picture. That's Evolution by Genetic mutation.

The fittest/best adapted to the overall environment will be more successful, fuck more, and generally take over the world. Killing other shit. The fittest of these will go on to procreate, creating a cycle of "best man wins". That's Natural Selection.

In a nutshell. It's pretty basic, but accurate.

>but how did this transfer to his children.

With each generation, the ones who could stand "upright" the best were more successful than the short arses, creating a cycle where standing upright was more common that not. You probably have your dads chin, or mums legs, or dads height. Same principle with hips and spines. "Tall uprights with long arms" could see over tall grass, and run faster. They out-lived the others.

We out-lived the others.

>>7663672
I hope that made sense.

I'm kinda stoned.

>>7663672
>Not at first, but over time, due to environment, diet, climate etc Mutations happen. Some grow tall, some short, some fast, some slow, some white, some black etc You get the picture. That's Evolution by Genetic mutation.

Most heritable mutations are due to errors in DNA replication in the germline. They don't really have much to do with environment so much as they are caused by the fact that DNA polymerases are slightly error-prone. Polymerases have a correction function, but it's imperfect.

>>7663602
>had me stomped.
I believe the phrase is "stumped".

>>7663706
No. His mother had him restrained and stomped on, after he failed to answer her question.

>>7663683
I did not know that, I always just assumed that the variations in environment played the catalyst for the mutation. Thanks anon.

>>7663623
The biggest misconception about evolution is that animals can choose how tr evolve. A giraffe didn't grow a long neck to chew on high leaves, the chew on high leaves because they have long necks.

>>7663725
What then was the point of separating evolution by genetic mutations from evolution by natural selection? That's exactly the split.

>>7663602

Genetics give us our behavior (like standing up). Those who stood up survived better than those who didn't. Therefore, those who stood up had more kids, and the gene* for standing up was passed to a larger proportion of the population with each successive generation.

*Obviously there is no 'standing up' gene, but I'm just simplifying.

>>7663602
literally who knows, but you aren't arguing that you could point out the walking gene

you're arguing that there exists a structure by which heritibility is possible and that there are conceivable pressures that select for phenotypes (which may be mutiple, degenerate, come with benefits and risks, may be selected against later, may be disfunctional )

you need a good grasp of the biophysics, the read-write state of the genome, and the various mechanisms of control that exist within a single cell in order to come up with plausible bullshit about walking...

its also proven that lamarkian evolution does exist in higher order organisms via heritable tagging/structural organization of the genome ( re: acetylation/methylation/histones )


So let me give you an example that is pertinent,
https://news.brown.edu/articles/2012/04/dadar

in this example it is not a 'gene' but parts of the genome which are still transcribed (non-coding) that is enabling a phenotype

This is just an example of how complicated internal processing of the genome is, and if you want just a glimpse of it check out DICER, quroum sensing, and the kinetochore.