Showing posts with label Evolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Evolution. Show all posts

Monday, October 5, 2026

Viva Las Vegas

 


Alt Right gadfly Vox Day is currently enbroiled in some drama with Erika "Gutsick Gibbon", a science influencer on YouTube who questioned his critique of evolutionary theory. 

Says Vox: "It’s probably best that Ericka runs away now, considering what happened to the last woman who tried to debate me. For those of you who weren’t around then, she literally abandoned the debate after three rounds and ran off to Las Vegas to start a new career as a prostitute at a legal brothel. I’m neither kidding nor exaggerating for effect. You can look it up. You can probably still buy her services, for that matter."

Oookay. The Internet is forever, as they say...

Wednesday, September 23, 2026

Good genes

 


From a Social Darwinist viewpoint, this guy was clearly more succesful than Anne Wittecombe, an asexual childless spinster. But sure, I suppose it would have been more impressive if Peter Rolfe had been a true manor lord in addition to his more hands-on genetic proclivities...

"Shamless benefits claimant dead" (et cetera)

"My heart is broken"

Thursday, September 10, 2026

Sugar-maxxing (Mellified Man was a fruit cake)

 


Not sure if I like the implications of this, tbh. But it is what it is. Note the speculation that while our brains can´t evolve further, ape brains - at least hypothetically - could still do so. So "Planet of the Apes" is at theoretically possible? The idea that sugar rather than meat made our brains bigger is funny, since it sounds "gay" and "feminist". The sugar would have come from fruit and honey. And fruit could be gathered by females. But sure, Man the Hunter could be replaced by Man the Brave Slasher of Killer-Bees...

The implications I´m talking about is something else. So presumably part of our "junk DNA" came unplugged at some point in ape(ish) evolution, making our brains more complex and hence smarter almost by chance. Oookay. Let´s hope God put that junk in our cells, dude! 

Wednesday, September 2, 2026

Creationism´s Trojan Horse?

 


A recent critique of the so-called Third Way of Evolution (or Third Way). I assumed TWE was a legitimate - albeit controversial - participant in the scientific debates on Neo-Darwinism, but according to the video above, TWE has diplomatic relations with creationists from the Discovery Institute. 

The famed "crisis meeting" at the British Royal Society, which is often mentioned by creationists, was actually called by TWE´s founder Denis Noble himself. In other words, it was simply a TWE-adjacent meeting, not some kind of official scientific conference trying to salvage a evolutionary theory in deep trouble. Some fellows from the Discovery Institute were invited to participate. 

The critics charge that TWE has no scientific standing. That is, their research (if they even do any) isn´t leading anywhere. The more speculative supporters of TWE believe that the individual organism can willingly chose to evolve! There is currently no evidence for this super-Lamarckian take on things.  

Meanwhile, standard evolutionary science has already incorporated other mechanisms besides natural selection working on genetic mutations, for instance epigenetic inheritance, so "narrow Neo-Darwinism" isn´t a thing anymore. This extended synthesis explains things just fine and has lead to huge progress in the medical field (which happens to be Noble´s field).

But note that Sam McKee (the guy on the left in the video) speaks highly of Simon Conway Morris, who is a Christian and believes that evolutionary convergence is an argument for teleology and hence God. Conway Morris recently got a huge grant from the Templeton Foundation. McKee also points to remarkable convergence all across the board in evolution, but never explicitly draws the same conclusion as his collegue. Yet, McKee is a Christian himself. 

Maybe there is more to discover here...

Monday, August 31, 2026

Second breakfast

 


Another video on the Homo florensiensis situation. Recent research suggests that the "Hobbit" might not be a dwarfed Homo erectus (sensu stricto) but some kind of pre-human or almost-human. Perhaps an australopith (sensu latto)? I´m not surprised. I had a hunch in this direction already seven years ago. So can we go home now? Second breakfast, guys!

Bigfoot evidence

Thursday, August 20, 2026

Friday, July 31, 2026

The perfect shave

 


Attributed to Charles Darwin: "Whilst Man, however well-behaved, at best is but a monkey shaved!"

Wednesday, July 22, 2026

When Elvis met the zombies

 


So I asked ChatGPT (the free version) about "Elvis taxa" and "zombie taxa"...

What are Elvis taxa and zombie taxa?

These are two colorful terms used in biology and paleontology to describe different kinds of "apparent resurrections." They're informal rather than formal taxonomic categories, but they're widely understood.

Lazarus taxa

As we discussed, a Lazarus taxon is a species or lineage that was believed extinct but is later found to have survived.

Examples include:

  • Coelacanth
  • Wollemi pine
  • Lord Howe Island stick insect

The species never actually disappeared—it was simply overlooked.


Elvis taxa

An Elvis taxon is different.

The name refers jokingly to Elvis Presley impersonators.

An Elvis taxon is:

  • a newly evolved species,
  • that closely resembles an extinct one,
  • so it can easily be mistaken for the original.

The extinct organism has not returned.

Instead, evolution has independently produced something very similar.

Example

Imagine a trilobite species goes extinct.

Ten million years later another arthropod evolves that looks remarkably like that trilobite.

It isn't the same species or even necessarily closely related—it merely resembles it.

That resemblance makes it an Elvis taxon.

Real examples

Paleontologists have suggested Elvis taxa among:

  • planktonic microorganisms,
  • foraminifera,
  • ammonites,
  • certain fossil mollusks.

In these groups, shell shape can evolve repeatedly under similar environmental pressures.


Zombie taxa

A zombie taxon is something else again.

It is a fossil or specimen that appears much younger than it really is because it has been reworked.

For example:

  1. A dinosaur fossil is buried 100 million years ago.
  2. Millions of years later erosion exposes it.
  3. Rivers transport the fossil.
  4. It becomes buried again in sediments only a few million years old.

Someone finds it in the younger rocks and initially thinks:

"Dinosaurs survived much longer than we thought!"

But they did not.

The fossil itself is old—it has merely been redeposited.

It is therefore a zombie taxon.


Why zombie taxa matter

They can temporarily produce spectacular but false claims, such as:

  • dinosaurs surviving into the Paleogene,
  • marine reptiles surviving millions of years after their extinction.

Usually careful geological analysis shows the fossils were reworked from older deposits.


Other "resurrection" terms

Paleontology has accumulated several humorous terms:

  • Lazarus taxon – survives unnoticed, then is rediscovered.
  • Elvis taxon – an unrelated or newly evolved look-alike mistaken for the extinct form.
  • Zombie taxon – an old fossil redeposited into younger rocks, giving the illusion of later survival.

Some authors also mention "ghost lineages," though this is a different concept. A ghost lineage is an inferred evolutionary lineage that must have existed because of phylogenetic evidence, even though fossils from that interval have not yet been found.

A simple comparison

TermWhat happened?Organism actually survived?
Lazarus taxonSurvived unnoticed and was rediscoveredYes
Elvis taxonA different species evolved to resemble the extinct oneNo
Zombie taxonAn old fossil was reworked into younger rocksNo
Ghost lineageEvolution predicts the lineage existed despite a gap in the fossil recordUnknown (it's an inference about missing fossils rather than survival)

Together, these concepts remind us that the fossil record can be misleading in different ways. A surprising "reappearance" may represent a genuine rediscovery (Lazarus), convergent evolution (Elvis), geological redeposition (Zombie), or simply an incomplete fossil record (ghost lineage).

Tuesday, July 14, 2026

Missing context

 


- Oh, the missing link? Yeah, he´s not *quite* missing yet, but he will be soon, trust me, bro!

The transition that wasn´t

 


Ahem...has Homo habilis really been dethroned from his position as transitional form between Australopithecus and Homo erectus (sensu latto)? So now what? Has the missing link gone missing again? Don´t tell the creationists, dude. 

Barely human, merely Hobbit?

 


New research on the mysterious "human" (?) species known as Homo floresiensis suggests that they didn´t and couldn´t hunt dwarf elephants in their island habitat of Flores 100,000 years ago. Rather, the Hobbit (as this species of Homo is colloquially called) was feeding on carcasses of said pachyderm. The unfortunate proboscids had already been hunted and killed by Komodo dragons! That is, the extremely large monitor lizards known as "Komodo dragons" (this species of reptile is of course still around). 

Not sure what to make of this. If Homo floresiensis is an example of insular dwarfism - a shrunken Homo erectus as it were - then the erecti weren´t fully "human" in our sense of the term, still being subject to natural selection (which our species can at least try to escape or transcend). But isn´t there also evidence that Homo erectus were smarter than hitherto assumed? I mean, how on earth did they even *reach* Flores in the first place?

So I don´t know. Something strange is going on here. Either evolution can in extreme cases "go backward" even in a lineage were intelligence is developing. Or the good ol´ Hobbit wasn´t really a human in the first place, but some kind of stray australopith a long way from home...

Both perspectives are pretty mind-boggling. So if Frodo and his 57 half-cousins keep you up at night, pray that the Hobbits (those at Flores) were just monkeys! 

Thursday, July 9, 2026

Tyger tyger burning bright

 


"Apparently, some so-called scientists (big game hunters, more like it) of the Afrikan Ape persuasion claim that tigers and panthers are products of a blind process of evolution which didn´t have us in mind?! May the holy were-cat curse and consume these blasphemers!" 

"Oh, and they claim that tigers are orange and panthers black, when everyone knows that we´re actually green and blue. I mean, what the heck is `orange´anyway? As any feline philosopher can tell you, color is an objective property of reality."

"Read my lips before I eat you: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ORANGE ON THE PLANET OF THE CATS!!!"

"What?" 

Concealment


 

According to atheism as informed by modern science, God doesn´t exist. Humans are temporary products of a blind process of evolution that didn´t have them in mind. Here is an intriguing idea: God does exist *and* humans are products of a blind process of evolution that didn´t have them in mind.

How does that make you feel, earthling?  

Tuesday, June 2, 2026

Thursday, May 28, 2026

Full spectrum bullshit?

 

Credit: Skalle-Per Hedenhös (sic)

Richard Carrier on the attack...again. An atheist-materialist take on consciousness, et cetera. 

Note the claim that some robots and smart cars may be (somewhat) conscious. Insects, on the other hand, aren´t conscious. Neither are octopi. Fish probably aren´t either: "They aren´t really alive, they´re just less dead". And if you´re not conscious, you can´t really feel anything either. So ants don´t feel anything when we dispose of them them using poison. The tuna didn´t feel anything when it was hooked and killed. Pigs do feel and experience things, but since they aren´t self-aware, their lives have no actual value to them. Like pigs to the slaughter! Human babies are more advanced than pigs (this is a veiled polemic against Peter Singer, methinks).

The "existential" consequences of the above are...interesting. So entire *civilizations* can be created simply on the basis of subconscious computation by non-sentient life-forms? I´m thinking of social insects such as ants, termites and honeybees. Where does that leave us in a wholly materialist universe? Note also that robots could (presumably) be made fully self-conscious. Finally, note that consciousness requires "modeling", which seems to imply that consciousness can only ever be "indirectly realist". Are ants direct realists?

OK, here is the link: 

Distinguishing Awareness, Intelligence and Consciousness 

Monday, May 25, 2026

Where have all the people gone?

 


Styx says that it isn´t a great mystery why birth rates are falling. I disagree. Birth rates are falling all over the world. I assume #MeToo or feminism doesn´t exist in, say, Niger? The cause of the demographic crisis must be global. None of the factors he mentions fits the bill, not even overcrowding. Many "Third World" nations are clearly more overcrowded than the Western ones, yet their birth rates (while falling) are still above replacement level. Again: Niger. 

I admit I have no idea why the birth rates are falling, including in areas where they "shouldn´t". It´s almost as if the Moon does eat people, or something.   

Thursday, May 7, 2026

The Claude Delusion

 


Richard Dawkins out? His essay for UnHerd are behind a pay wall, but here is a summary and some comments in "The Guardian". 

Everyone who hates Dawkins for his "transphobia" is mocking him on YouTube for thinking that the LLM Claude is conscious (and for gender-swapping Claude to Claudia). Soon enough creationists will join the fray, just wait. Kind of a sad ending, really. 

Richard Dawkins concludes AI is conscious

Sunday, May 3, 2026

From panspermia to great filter

 




Sabine Hossenfelder strikes again.

Does life come from outer space, but eventually reaches a "great filter", explaining the Fermi paradox? Microscopic life might be extremely common in the universe, but space-faring civilizations probably aren´t. Somehow, it feels like a "waste of space" if panspermia is true but almost never gives rise to a United Federation of Planets...