@GodZoo
Sorry to go back, but I have just jumped on this thread.
The modern synthesis is a very broad and often complex paradigm. The purpose of Cofty's OP was to briefly review some aspects of the evolution of colour vision. You made out that mentioning...
Following the sudden demise of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago our ancestors began to thrive. Lots of vacant niches were available to be exploited including the opportunity to feed in daylight.
...is a "simplistic argument". Just of out interest, if you had to chose again do you think the above quote is either
a) a simplistic argument
or
b) a very short summary of a well researched body of evidence that would not be appropriate to labour in a post on color vision.
It amazes me how people can look at their watch and state with such certainty that this or that happened 65 million years ago give or take a few trillion years..
I can only assume this is supposed to be humour. You seem to be suggesting there is no method science can employ to discern events in the distant past? At what date in the past do you believe science becomes ineffective?
People can not even remember their own childhoods accurately yet they want you to believe and base your reality on what they say happened 65 million years ago?
You are comparing testable physical evidence to a human's ability to remember their childhood. What exactly is your point? Who is 'they'?
Let's be honest it all sounds very clever and precise but the truth is no one really has a clue and are just wildly stabbing in the dark.
Are you being honest? Which bit is wildly stabbing in the dark specifically? The date? Evolutionary developments due to extinction events? Please do explain. Perhaps if you could actually make a specific point or raise an specific objection the board might be able to understand your viewpoint?