Scotticus Erroticus wrote:volution involves the instincts of animals changing to suit their environment and to survive.
No. It really, really doesn't. Evolution is the novelisation (mutation) of a particular gene. To put it in brief terms, the novelisation means that a different protein is coded for, which may have one of several million consequences, mostly ending with the mutuation being useless and the novel gene being lost. However once in a while it's actually beneficial to the animal in it's niche and the new gene survives because it increases the fitness (survival) of the animal/the gene. It has strawberry float all to do with a magical instinct.
So, this shark that decided to venture out into the water could have gone against its instincts in doing so. I'm not suggesting that all sharks are
going to jump out of the water and bask in the New Jersey sun; rather I am saying that it could be that this animal went against its own natural-script (instinct) to leave the sea and go onto land. It
could be that the shark does this quite often, we just don't often see it. So over a period of millions and millions of years of continued instinctive changes, this kind of fish could change its behaviour
to involve the land/coast/beach/whatever in its own way to survive.
Firstly, niggling point but a shark isn't a fish.
1) It would go against it's insticts only if it had been behaviourally
coded to do so, which is perfectly possible. However, if it did this, it would have ended up all corpsey. The novel mutation would have been useless as the animal would have died and the genetic material would have died with it, meaning that others would not have been exhibiting the same behaviour (unless there was a separate mutation - highly unlikely, and even if it occured, this would have ended with the same result).
2) I have no idea why you've decided to believe that "instinct" is a giant Deus Ex Machina to explain why an animal would do something suicidal, and then try and fob it off as something to do with evolution. See above: Instinct is an ecological phenomenon, not a method for changing how your DNA codes itself.
3) This isn't a criticism, but if you want a better explanation then head to the library and pick up a copy of The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (The Blind Watchmaker is also pretty good). You seem to think some people are trolling you for airing your views without realising how utterly ridiculous they are.