Culture Darwinism Evolution speciation

Is the recently cited hybrid dolphin-whale a “new species”? No.

Spread the love
Peponocephala electra Mayotte.jpg
melon-headed dolphin (sometimes called whale)/Cyril di Bisceglie (CC)

From HuffPost:

Scientists off the coast of Hawaii have discovered a never-before-seen hybrid sea creature ― a cross between a rough-toothed dolphin and a melon-headed whale.

But while the discovery is definitely cool, many news reports have jumped the gun a little bit by referring to the creature as a totally “new species.” Hilary Hanson, “No, Researchers Didn’t Discover A New Whale-Dolphin Hybrid Species” at HuffPost

rough-toothed dolphin/Gustavo Pérez (CC)

Lone hybrids are not classified by anyone as new species because they usually don’t form a new group. They stay with their herd. Anyway, the melon-headed whale is a type of dolphin, so the animal spotted is a hybrid dolphin.

But here’s a typical “brand new species” news claim:

Note: The concept of speciation in general is a huge mess (see links below), principally because it is taken as confirmation of explicitly Darwinian evolution (you know, On the Origin of Species and all that… ). It’s the same sort of problem as when a religious sect seeks to confirm a miracle. They degrade the definition and damage the concept.

See also: Speciation: A bread yeast and a yeast that causes infections turn out to be the same species

The concept of a “species,” as in On the Origin of Species, may well be in itself a dated idea, especially where fast-reproducing unicellular life forms are concerned. A measure that capture fluidity is needed.

Study: Species are “compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space.”

Monkeys more closely related to sister species than same species in different locations?

Endangered giant Chinese salamander is at least five different “species”


Nothing says “Darwin snob” like indifference to the mess that the entire concept of speciation is in.

One Reply to “Is the recently cited hybrid dolphin-whale a “new species”? No.

  1. 1 says:

    Those that believe the “reproductive isolation” story point to minor adaptations, which they call “speciation” (implying stability) and then ask us to extrapolate these small changes into the dramatic transmutations imagined yet never observed by Darwin or his followers. This is a classic trick – employed extensively by magicians, cinematographers and con artists among others – where one thing is shown and the brain then “sees” another that is not there.

Leave a Reply