Skip to main content


Evolution doesn’t look how it’s depicted in pop culture. We often picture the famous “March of Progress” illustration where a series of apes stand in line leading to a modern human.

But evolution is not linear. It branches and branches. Divides in some places and recombines in others. #science
Image: @keesey

in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

And also all the multicellular stuff is basically evolutionary outliers. (-;
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

It looks like above when you walk back from one species towards its origin (no branching on the way back). It is basically a history graph.

Just saying the top graph also has its purpose.

This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

they have the entire “family tree” with all divergent branches up at the National Museum of Scotland. It’s fascinating. There are some tiny primates (tarsiers, lemurs, marmosets, lorises) that I didn’t know much about. nms.ac.uk/exhibitions/monkeys-…
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

It depends on the criteria we use to define branching, no ? With a DNA-based criteria, I guess this would be one branch for every born human, but the more the criteria encompass things, the more the tree flattens (up to be linerar) ?
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

So true. I hate that the march of progress fully implies that humans are the 'best' because of their position.

In reality the evolutionary diagram puts all currently living organisms on the same podium. Modern humans are not the end goal.

in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

Your right. But who will explain this to Fatboy Slim now?

youtu.be/ub747pprmJ8

in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

Down with teleology, I say.

The cladal bush works on a number of scales, but its best message is that context matters, any singular definition in biology is just an artefact made up to group a diverse and varying population into a discussion point.

Also that if you do find a population lacking in diversity and variability, that twig on the bush is not going to last long.

in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

It’s missing sections of crossbreeding. different breeds of monkey were also melded in.and in even earlier splits there were quadrapeds.
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

Nature did what it had to give us nice buttocks
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

Sure there are short linear blips, long curvy differentials... all between the Big Bang/Crunch Singularities.

Without scalar differential equations; there's no you, me, or a bird named bee. Now where are those flowers and trees?..

in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

yeah it’s so interesting. One thing I like to learn about is how two very similar organisms came to exist on other sides of the planet
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

politics

Sensitive content

in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

well - "evolution" is not only "branching", but 'doing' something more weird than being a spreading bush - it's re-branching. that's what's maybe missing in this nice illustration?
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

why does it then become scattered. Is it that we have some people who aren't of our kind?
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

Caricature says "Something something transitional fossils."

(All the fossils are transitional forms, except a few tgst are dead ends. We are a transitional forms. Let us try not to be th3 latter.)

This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

For me it seems as if evolution is only a cosmetic thing.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

the only one who looks happy is at the root of the tree.

It's almost as if we're getting something wrong.

in reply to Sheril Kirshenbaum

(it "only" took a few billion years🌎 for "it"🧠 to begin to understand "itself)

at least parts of (eukaryotic) yeast and human genes are "homologous" and functionally similar enough to function in either "host "
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/…

Lo, thar be cookies on this site to keep track of your login. By clicking 'okay', you are CONSENTING to this.