A major journal observes that key assumptions of the neo-Darwinian synthesis are being overturned.
Convoluted phylogenetic trees, seemingly required by the genetic data, suggest that highly complex biological structures have been gained and lost many times in evolutionary history.
Enter biologist Ken Miller, who in 2013 submitted for adoption in Texas his textbook Biology, which promotes the opposite of critical thinking on evolution.
In the thinking of evolutionary biologists, can common descent, even in principle, be falsified?
Yet another example showing that the methods of phylogenetic reconstruction — used to bolster common descent — often yield results at variance with the evidence.