The rapid evolution of the eye (debunked): Scientific marketing || Part 1

A couple of decades ago, a paper was published, which purported to show that an eye can actually evolve really quickly - in as little time as 360,000 years. This was a reasonably big deal, since the ability of such a complex organ to evolve was something of a sticking point for darwinian evolution.

This paper has since been referenced all over the place, as evidence that complex eyes can evolve really quickly. If the paper is read with a critical eye, however, it becomes clear that it doesn't really say what everyone thinks it says and that the eye remains a significant problem for Darwinian evolution.

This video is Part 1 of my analysis of this paper. Here, we look at the apparent mismatch between what people think the paper says, what the paper claims to say, and what it actually says. The phenomenon of "scientific marketing".

References
"A Pessimistic Estimate of the Time Required for an Eye to Evolve", Nilsson Pegler (1994)

Licenses
CC BY-SA 3.0