Misconceptions about evolution: why species are not “getting better”

Evolution of Mario Video Games Nintendo NES WII N64 Gamecube Sunshine Brawl Super Bros Weekly Show

Part 5 in a series. Click here for part 4: why natural selection is not random

Things have felt a bit different lately. Perhaps it’s the weather. Maybe it’s the new baseball season. No? Oh, I’ve got it—it’s been too long since we had a Misconceptions About Evolution!

Evolution of Mario Video Games Nintendo NES WII N64 Gamecube Sunshine Brawl Super Bros Weekly Show

Oftentimes, the older version of a mascot or species seems better. Things were simpler back then.

My freshman year of college I had a floormate named Steve. Steve’s man goal in life was to get better—no matter the subject, his aim was to come out more accomplished than he came in. Everything Steve did had this goal in mind—he studied, exercised, and ate with more fervor than the competition, and sure enough he became slightly better. Well done, Steve.

Many see evolution in the same light. Species are constantly getting better, improving themselves to become evolutionarily superior…except not quite. Much like Steve’s devotion to self-improvement, there is much more to this than meets the eye.

Why species are not “getting better”

Let’s recall the basic ideas behind evolution. Over time a species’ genetic makeup changes. These alterations stem from mutations, outside pressures, and statistical phenomena. While many of these changes have little effect, some can increase an individual’s chances of survival and reproduction. Let’s use the example of a fish with improved eyesight. Our seafaring friend will be able to better identify food and predators, which will in turn increase his odds of survival.

As our fish reproduces, some of his offspring carry his new trait. These little fish again survive more often than the others, and in time a sizable portion of the fish population will have better eyesight. This is the beauty of natural selection. So far, it seems the Steve analogy applies—our fish friends are getting better.

Now imagine the lake experiences an algae outbreak. Microorganisms cloud the surface, cloaking the water in darkness. Our fishes’ eyesight, previously an optimal trait, can hardly make out anything at all. This is a bad day to be a fish. Any that relied on eyesight will either starve or find themselves in the belly of a predator.

So what happened? Even though the fish’s vision allowed it to thrive in direct sunlight, it became useless in the dark. An ability advantageous in one situation proved ineffective in another. This is the key to understanding natural selection—species adapt to their environments. This includes everything from amount of sunlight to terrain and predators. Unfortunately for Steve, “getting better” has no meaning in natural selection.

As for our fish friends, their future is uncertain. Maybe individuals with better hearing will find higher rates of survival in the new world. Perhaps the population will die out. It all depends on the fishes’ surroundings and which traits ensure higher chances of survival.

So there’s a bit of Misconceptions About Evolution to brighten your day. Is this surprising? Confusing? Remarkably good looking? Let me know in the comments below. As always—you know the drill, so please share, like, comment, and subscribe if you like the post! Thanks for reading! Don’t forget to subscribe for new content every Wednesday. IT’S FREE!

Comment question of the week

Are human beings currently “getting better?” Why or why not?

You might also like:

Misconceptions About Evolution: Why Natural Selection Is Not Random

Everything In Science Is Wrong

Misconceptions About Evolution: Why Transitional Fossils Exist

In the news:

When Evolution’s Controversial, Declaring a State Fossil Can Get Tricky (Smithsonian)

10 Ways Life Has Adapted to Its Environment (Discovery)

Congressional Candidate Claims He’s Running to Stop Schools From Teaching Evolution (ThinkProgress)


Is gaydar real?

Gaydar Real Fake Scientific Exist Stereotype Rule Study Weekly Show

Since the 1980s, gaydar has become a common word in the English language. A combination of “gay” and “radar,” Merriam-Webster defines it as “the ability to recognize homosexuals through observation or intuition.” Clearly, the idea is ridiculous (not to mention insulting to gay people). But what if I told you not only that gaydar exists but that it is a scientifically documented phenomenon? Enter one of the weirdest and most fascinating series of studies this blogger has ever seen.

In 2008, Dr. Nicholas Rule of the University of Toronto (then a Ph.D. candidate at Tufts University) began to investigate the idea of using visual cues to determine someone’s membership to  a perceptually ambiguous group (i.e. one without clear physical identifiers, such as religion or sexual orientation). Rule and fellow researchers gathered headshots of individuals and removed hairstyles, piercings, makeup, tattoos, or any other cultural markings. In a series of experiments, they flashed the bare faces for five hundred milliseconds and asked subjects to determine whether their sexual orientation. The results were shocking.

Gaydar Real Fake Scientific Exist Stereotype Rule Study Weekly Show

Gaydar: a made-up concept or a scientific phenomenon?

Continue reading

5 more mind-bending optical illusions

Walking Men Size Perspective Optical Illusion Weekly Show

Part 2 in a series. Click here for Part 1: 5 mind-bendingly awesome optical illusions

A while back I posted about some awesome optical illusions. The last few posts have been text-heavy, so I’m going to shake things up a bit with some pictures and videos. These are some of my favorite mind-tricks on the web. Share your favorites and let me know which one’s you’d like me to explain. Enjoy!

5. The Walking Men Illusion

These men are the same size. Seriously. Grab a ruler and check for yourself.

Walking Men Size Perspective Optical Illusion Weekly Show Continue reading