Evolved “backward”? In other words, devolution? Funny, so few ever question a theory that is always being overturned by new findings.
Devolution
At Quanta Magazine: By Losing Genes, Life Often Evolved More Complexity
The unanswered question in the article is, “How did the genes develop in the first place?”
At Evolution News: Mammoth Support for Devolution
Michael Behe: “The more science progresses, the more hapless Darwin seems.”
At Evolution News: Much Ado About Lactase Persistence
Michael Behe provides insightful comments on the recent report discussing lactase persistence.
Devolution in a flower is remarketed as “sudden evolutionary change”
If a lineage of peacocks lost the showy tails due to a transmissible genetic defect — but was thus better able to flee predators — that could also be marketed as “sudden evolutionary change.” But what question about the origin of complex life would such terminology engineering really answer?