Quote
Evolution has been observed to occur quite rapidly -- surprisingly rapidly. I read an article recently about species of weeds that had adapted to an urban environment which favours quick germination in places like cracks in the pavement. In just several generations, these weeds' reproductive cycles had changed noticeably from those of their rural counterparts. Sceintists were puzzled by this.
These scientists need to remove their evogoggles and look at the world. My memory's weak, and I know of the top of my head there are many, many animals that vary their reproductive rates according to population density. This has been known at least since the 1930's, probably much longer.

Some animals even become sterile when population density gets too high. Rats have a high threshold, but when packed too tightly they go insane. They become violent and quit mating.

I confidently googled: "'population density' reproduction" and got results.

This one is about plants.
This one is less interesting.
Quote
"Animals can change their reproductive output depending on certain environmental conditions. And one of those environmental conditions is population density," notes Tim Karels, lead author of the paper who conducted the research as part of his PhD thesis at U of T. "So if you have lots of neighbours and you're competing for the same food, it can lower reproduction. And that's what we saw. At very high population densities, female ground squirrels basically shut down their reproduction, and that was done in order to sustain their own survival. When conditions were better, they would start reproducing again."
Always the idiotic Darwinian appeal to food! Invariably, animal populations take steps to control their density before approaching the mythical "food barrier". Even the lemmings - they don't wait until they're starving to death, or out of food. But observation doesn't mean much when you're dealing with religious faith.

Darwin's speculative (I'll take that word back if anyone shows he actually observed it) food paradigm only applies to disastrous circumstances (not universally, as he applied it). Famine, dumping too much population on a small island, situations like that. I guess yesterday's evogoggles are being replace with opaque contacts.

At any rate, this doesn't quite fit most definitions for "news". It was known way back even before the "horse evolution" was debunked, if you want to put it in perspective.

I'm afraid to ask, but I imagine they're claiming a mutation is rapidly spreading throughout the population, causing it to "evolve" a different this or that. I'm a creationist, and I predict it can "devolve" right back where it came from too (without a mutation).

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson