Remember kids, evolution never makes the fittest, it just makes the barely good enough to hump
@TriangleTesticles, literally I spend an entire slide of my "evolution and origin of life" lecture driving home the point "survival of the fittest is a myth. It's more accurately 'survival of the adequate at the time.'"
@TriangleTesticles, honestly the biggest argument against intelligent design is how dumb and Ill-prepared organisms turn out sometimes
@OopsIEsploded, adequate at the time would be the fittest right?
@Mantis Tobaggan, nope. "Fittest" implies there is some organism that is *most* fit, i.e., the "best." While those most fit to survive certainly will survive, so will those who can scratch on by.
It's a small distinction, but an important one: it means that you don't need the *best* traits to be successful, you just need traits that *don't get you killed.* Suboptimal traits can—and commonly do—get passed on.
If you need an example: Huntington's disease. A crippling neurodegenerative disease that is definitely a disadvantage. But since it only strikes after an individual has reached the age at which they've likely reproduced (youngest is usually 40 or so), it's still found in the population today.
A big thing this separation of "adequate" and "best" also does is demolish the idea that evolution is going somewhere—is reaching for some "superior" organism. It's not. It's just reactionary, and it only gets rid of the worst instead of keeping the best.
@TriangleTesticles, evolution invented laziness
If god had duct tape humans would’ve turned out much better
@BigJohnson86, I need more ductape on my back it’s killin me
Most of our DNA works despite all the errors that occur thanks to a small stop codon that tells it to scrap that copy and do it again. Kinda like when cells get old. Our DNA could theoretically produce enzymes to fix it, but they go with the “cell suicide option” and just make another cell.
@A Flying Panda, sounds like a real "engineered to be thrown away" society
Zoologists: NOW KISS