Wayne, I believe you are substantially correct in your understanding of the general perception of "improvement" through natural selection and evolution. I am surprised at Dawkins, as he is considered both one of the top evolutionary biologists and a top publicist for evolution and scientific thinking. Hmmm...... . Attenborough I am not surprised about, and though he has been very successful at helping the public understand a great deal about nature, I have heard a good bit of this "progress" notion from him in the "Nature" series, including just this week regarding Chimpanzees, tool usage, and the relationship of Chimpanzees to people (though of course, and as Attenborough certainly knows, there is no ancestral relationship between the two).
David McNeely ---- Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks to Catherine for the link to this actual list. My example of a > misconception (example: Evolution improves species over time.) is quite well > answered: > > "MISCONCEPTION: Evolution results in progress; organisms are always getting > better through evolution. > > "CORRECTION: One important mechanism of evolution, natural selection, does > result in the evolution of improved abilities to survive and reproduce; > however, this does not mean that evolution is progressive - for several > reasons. First, as described in a misconception below (link to "Natural > selection produces organisms perfectly suited to their environments"), > natural selection does not produce organisms perfectly suited to their > environments. It often allows the survival of individuals with a range of > traits - individuals that are "good enough" to survive. Hence, evolutionary > change is not always necessary for species to persist. Many taxa (like some > mosses, fungi, sharks, opossums, and crayfish) have changed little > physically over great expanses of time. Second, there are other mechanisms > of evolution that don't cause adaptive change. Mutation, migration, and > genetic drift may cause populations to evolve in ways that are actually > harmful overall or make them less suitable for their environments. For > example, the Afrikaner population of South Africa has an unusually high > frequency of the gene responsible for Huntington's disease because the gene > version drifted to high frequency as the population grew from a small > starting population. Finally, the whole idea of "progress" doesn't make > sense when it comes to evolution. Climates change, rivers shift course, new > competitors invade - and an organism with traits that are beneficial in one > situation may be poorly equipped for survival when the environment changes. > And even if we focus on a single environment and habitat, the idea of how to > measure "progress" is skewed by the perspective of the observer. From a > plant's perspective, the best measure of progress might be photosynthetic > ability; from a spider's it might be the efficiency of a venom delivery > system; from a human's, cognitive ability. It is tempting to see evolution > as a grand progressive ladder with Homo sapiens emerging at the top. But > evolution produces a tree, not a ladder - and we are just one of many twigs > on the tree." > > According to my straw polls of randomly selected people, usually with quite > good minds and broad knowledge, cling to this misconception. I wonder what > percentage of "scientists," particularly evolutionary biologists, continue > to entertain this misconception. I may, myself, be laboring under a > misconception, but I first became interested in this when I saw a David > Attenborough nature program on TV, where he and a professor were discussing > the evolution of trilobites; both spoke of the concept of "advancement" of > species. I was unable to contact Sir Attenborough, but I did contact the > professor, tops in the field, and asked if he thought that trilobites > "advanced" or improved with time. He responded in the affirmative. I asked > the same question that has thus far been circumvented by this thread > recently, particularly by questioners on that specific point, of the > professor--if he then though that Neanderthals were inferior to Cro-Magnons. > He did not, then, reply. > > I then posted the question to Jerry Coyne's blog, "Why Evolution is True," > and immediately got a response from someone calling himself "Richard > Dawkins" who said something to the effect that species certainly did advance > or improve--an answer quite on point of the question. Other respondents > became angry and seemed to avoid the point (with at least one notable > exception), but the long and the short of it was that I ended up having to > apologize (for my impertinence?), for just what I'm not sure--but it kept me > from being asked to "leave," as Coyne has done with other impertinent > posters. My attempts at clarification having no substantial effect, I went > dark on the blog and now rarely read the posts. > > Unless I am wrong, it appears that this misconception was strongly > reinforced in the "public" mind by the 1965 publication of the Time-Life > book, "Human Evolution." A major feature of this book was a lovely, fold-out > page that illustrated how Homo sapiens had evolved from "more primitive" > ancestors, depicting what has been called "The March of Progress" among > other names. Both the drawing and the accompanying text seem to reinforce > this misconception. > > I beg to be corrected in the case of my own misconceptions; if not, I hope > this misconception will be laid to rest and that clarity finally will come, > at least among evolutionary biologists. > > WT > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Catherine Tarsiewicz" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 2:29 AM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] evolution vs. natural selection videos > > > > Hello EcoLog: > > > > The link below provides a pretty comprehensive list. There is a > > clarification given for each misconception. > > > > http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php > > > > Search "misconceptions" instead of "myths"; this is the common terminology > > for teachers to use when preparing for common erroneous ideas or beliefs. > > > > Regards, > > > > Catherine Tarsiewicz > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Ryan McEwan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Evolution **improves** fit between a species traits and and local > >> selection > >> pressure(s) through time. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > Bruce and Ecolog: > >> > > >> > I would like to see the video. And I would like to see a list of > >> > "strange > >> > myths." Perhaps Ecolog subscribers could post those of which they are > >> aware? > >> > > >> > For example: Evolution improves species over time. > >> > > >> > WT > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Robertson" <[email protected]> > >> > To: <[email protected]> > >> > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 10:43 AM > >> > Subject: [ECOLOG-L] evolution vs. natural selection videos > >> > > >> > > >> > Dear All, > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I've been looking for a great little short video on evolution and > >> natural > >> >> selection to show my sophomore college students. There used to be a > >> >> fantastic little video online entitled, "Evolution: Addressing > >> falsehoods, > >> >> explaining basics". It was done in flash animation, was narrated by a > >> >> British fellow, and gave the basics of evolution and natural selection > >> and > >> >> artificial selection in such a clean and fantastic way. I cannot find > >> >> it > >> >> any > >> >> longer but would love if anybody knows the creator or another link to > >> >> it > >> >> (that title may not be its original one). Other information about this > >> >> video. It gave an example on the origin of the modern desert banana, > >> >> and > >> >> spent a short amount of time debunking strange myths about evolution > >> >> by > >> >> those who don't understand it. Please let me know if you have clues or > >> >> a > >> >> link to this video, or if you can suggest an alternative that is > >> >> someone > >> >> short and concise. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Thank you very much, > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Bruce Robertson > >> >> > >> >> Assistant Professor of Biology > >> >> > >> >> Division of Science, Mathematics and Computing > >> >> > >> >> Bard College > >> >> > >> >> 30 Campus Drive > >> >> > >> >> Annandale-on-Hudson, New York 23504 > >> >> > >> >> Email: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > >> >> > >> >> Office: 845-752-2332 > >> >> > >> >> Homepage: brucerobertson.weebly.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ----- > >> >> No virus found in this message. > >> >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > >> >> Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2639/5563 - Release Date: > >> >> 01/28/13 > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2639/5568 - Release Date: 01/30/13 > > -- David McNeely
