but if the species already had the ability to go both ways is it really evolution rather than adaptation?
I think it's more formidable for an animal that relies on camouflage and elusiveness to be able to lay her eggs instead of carrying them around, slowing her down. Also, like I mentioned above, one would think that not having legs would be harder to eat/survive.
Maybe you're right. Maybe they were always physically ABLE to do so but it's a higher chance if survival to lay eggs.
Who knows? The predator threat may not have been so rampant. Nobody in this thread knows one way or the other.
I'm not saying one or the other but this is new to all of us so acting like someone knows what or why they're doing this is just as dumb as they type of people they're mocking.
This post was edited on 6/17 at 8:07 am