Technical "Morph" question

[Garter_Gertie]

Stefan, I think you, also are confusing natural selection with selective breeding. Previously you'd not mentioned humans - who are very selective - and we were discussing snakes.

Has the topic changed or the equation been added to? Humans, yes are selective, or I think subjective, when partnering. I think we need to not split hairs and tangent. We were talking about snakes and their morphs; humans at that time were not involved.

Unless I've missed some new idea on the subject - which is possible - I still feel what I think to be true, is true.

[Stefan-A]

Stefan, I think you, also are confusing natural selection with selective breeding. Previously you'd not mentioned humans - who are very selective - and we were discussing snakes.

Now you lost me.

Selective breeding is an extension of natural selection. By that, I mean that aberrant snakes, for example, have traits that actually make us favour them (I could just as well use dogs as an example). The same trait may not necessarily be an advantage under different circumstances, but under the circumstances that we have created, it is. Albinos are conspicuous and predators spot them easily. As a result, they occur much less frequently than normal coloured snakes in the wild. However, we favour them because of the trait that made them conspicuous in the first place.

Has the topic changed or the equation been added to? Humans, yes are selective, or I think subjective, when partnering. I think we need to not split hairs and tangent. We were talking about snakes and their morphs; humans at that time were not involved.

Well, the reason why I'm talking about humans here, is because I'm trying to illustrate why there's no relevant difference between a naturally occurring albino individual and one that is born as a result of selective breeding.