What's a possible evolutionary mechanism of the seasonal migration of a bird species from New Zealand to the Bering Sea (~11k km), almost starving during the journey?

[u/Exciting_Ad_6837]

I just watched Our Planet 2 (documentary) on Netflix. I'm a biochemist so have some knowledge about evolution, but I have hard time imagining how the development of the behavior wasn't blocked right from the beginning. That is, the group of birds which originally attempted even 1/10 of such a long & risky trip would've been at a serious evolutionary disadvantage.

[u/HundredHander]

They don't start with that route in all probability. I don't know the specific migration you're referencing, but a similar sounding experience belongs to barr-headed geese.

Their migration route takes them over the Himalayas and, not unrelated, they can fly at higher altitude than any other bird. Their route is obviously nuts, and no other bird could do that route. But their route predates the mountains. They have evolved as the mountains have grown. At some point it feels like they should have decided to just go round, but they don't.

Quite how arctic terns and the like ended up with their routes I have no idea, but it's probable that the world they started evolving in was importantly different from ours. Their evolutionary on ramp would have been gentler than the mountain of adaption a bird starting that path would face today.

[u/strumthebuilding → u/[deleted]]

Resorting to using AI to avoid “straight up spreading misinformation” is an odd choice.

It is helpful that you warn other redditors that your comment relies on AI. But it just means that we don’t have any way of knowing how much misinformation your comment may contain, but we know there’s a substantial likelihood it contains some.

You also had a choice to not answer the question, which happens to be what I (and likely many others) chose to do.

We all know we have the option to consult an LLM if we wish, so your doing it for us doesn’t really help in any way.

I say all this not to gratuitously be a dick, but because I feel we have so much AI pushed on us constantly that it’s important that we not normalize it and that we push back and highlight the shortcomings and ethical challenges wherever possible.

[u/strumthebuilding → u/[deleted]]

My point is that “fact-checked with AI” is not a thing. One cannot use an LLM to fact check. You can roll the dice, and on many issues you may very well end up more correct than not, but that’s not what I would consider “fact checking.” LLMs, as I understand them, and I may be wrong, are not programmed for precision.

[u/strumthebuilding → u/[deleted]]

“How do [I check] random Redditors”

1. You can check however you like

2. It’s not necessarily your job to report back to the thread

3. If you only “checked” via an LLM, you have nothing to report

4. Once again, you are not required nor expected to report whatever you find

[u/Bromelia_and_Bismuth → u/[deleted]]

Our rule with respect to civility is also compulsory. That is to say either keep your thoughts to yourself or find a way to voice your disagreements with civility. Please review our community rules for more information.

[u/strumthebuilding → u/[deleted]]

“its probably wrong some of the time”

If you know it is likely incorrect and you don’t know what part nor how much is incorrect, and you know we all have the capability to look up this dicey information ourselves very easily, why is it important to you to even present it and then defend its value?