Follow The Logic of Science on Facebook.
- Follow The Logic of Science on WordPress.com
Archives
- August 2021 (1)
- July 2021 (1)
- June 2021 (2)
- March 2021 (1)
- October 2020 (1)
- September 2020 (2)
- August 2020 (1)
- June 2020 (2)
- May 2020 (1)
- April 2020 (1)
- February 2020 (1)
- January 2020 (1)
- November 2019 (2)
- September 2019 (2)
- August 2019 (2)
- July 2019 (2)
- May 2019 (1)
- March 2019 (3)
- February 2019 (2)
- January 2019 (2)
- December 2018 (1)
- October 2018 (1)
- September 2018 (1)
- August 2018 (3)
- July 2018 (3)
- June 2018 (2)
- March 2018 (3)
- February 2018 (1)
- January 2018 (1)
- December 2017 (2)
- November 2017 (1)
- October 2017 (3)
- September 2017 (1)
- August 2017 (2)
- July 2017 (1)
- June 2017 (3)
- May 2017 (2)
- April 2017 (3)
- March 2017 (3)
- February 2017 (3)
- January 2017 (4)
- December 2016 (2)
- November 2016 (2)
- October 2016 (5)
- September 2016 (2)
- August 2016 (5)
- July 2016 (4)
- June 2016 (5)
- May 2016 (2)
- April 2016 (3)
- March 2016 (6)
- February 2016 (4)
- January 2016 (4)
- December 2015 (4)
- November 2015 (5)
- October 2015 (4)
- September 2015 (4)
- August 2015 (5)
- July 2015 (4)
- June 2015 (2)
- May 2015 (3)
- April 2015 (6)
- March 2015 (8)
- February 2015 (10)
- January 2015 (17)
Tag Archives: evolution is blind
GMOs and natural selection: Nature doesn’t give a crap about you
Last week, I shared a meme about GMOs on my blog’s Facebook page, and several people responded by arguing that genetic engineering (GE) shouldn’t be used because “it bypasses the natural evolutionary test of fitness.” I’ve heard this argument before, … Continue reading
Posted in GMO
Tagged appeal to nature fallacies, Bad arguments, evolution, evolution is blind, GMOs, Safety
7 Comments
Debunking creationism: a visual comparison of “micro” and “macroevolution”
Creationists often like to claim that there are two fundamentally different types of evolution: microevolution and macroevolution. They argue that microevolution does actually occur, but only produces small changes within a species or “kind” of animal. For example, most creationists … Continue reading
Reducing irreducible complexity
Irreducible complexity is the cornerstone of the intelligent design movement, and it is a popular argument among young earth creationists as well. In simplest terms, this argument states that some systems are too complex to have evolved via natural selection … Continue reading
Posted in Science of Evolution
Tagged Bad arguments, creationism, evolution, evolution is blind, intelligent design, natural selection
Comments Off on Reducing irreducible complexity
Evolution doesn’t give organisms what they need
When I am teaching evolution, I often like to ask my students to think about why a particular feature or trait evolved. I might, for example, ask them why flying squirrels evolved a flap of skin between their legs that … Continue reading
Posted in Science of Evolution
Tagged evolution, evolution is blind, natural selection
Comments Off on Evolution doesn’t give organisms what they need
