TD: -Those marsupial mammals fill the same ecological niches in Australia that placental mammals fill on other continents. Was Australia more "suitable" to the flying phalanger than it would have been to the flying squirrel? Was it more "suitable" to the Thylacine than it would have been to the wolf?This is a great point, and also reminds me that the writer of the article almost blindly bumped into far more interesting and true idea:
"But they have not evolved differently. Both are still simply alligators. Not even the most rash evolutionist would argue that they had evolved along identical lines by accident."... The alligator settled in these places because the environment suited its requirements.They almost hit upon "parallel evolution", which is ironically exactly what actually explains Australian animals. The fact that Australia has very few placental mammals, and mostly marsupial "versions" of mainland mammals only makes sense if early marsupials found themselves isolated on a vast island with no mammals to compete with, and could evolve to fill all the same unoccupied ecological niches.
-inkling
