Super fact – Super Facts

There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution

Superfact 89: There is overwhelming scientific evidence supporting so called macroevolution. Evidence for macroevolution includes the fossil record, molecular biology and DNA, biogeography, comparative anatomy, embryology, suboptimality, vestigial structures, etc.

It is difficult to deny that so called microevolution is happening since it can be directly observed. However, it is quite common to come across claims that there is no evidence for macroevolution or that macroevolution is impossible and unscientific. These claims do not come from mainstream scientists but from creationists. There is no magical barrier between microevolution and macroevolution. Rather, macroevolution is just an accumulation of microevolutionary steps, and it is a fact that those changes have been slowly accumulating over millions and billions of years.

Blue color on the left slowly fading into the red color on the right. | There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution — Microevolution is small changes resulting in large changes over time. There is no magical wall stopping multiple microevolution changes from turning into macroevolution.

It is often said that macroevolution is when a species evolves into another and that this represents a special barrier, impossible to breach. The existence of fuzzy boundaries between species and the existence of ring species demonstrate that this idea is faulty. See the next section for more information on this. Next after that, I am listing 10 selected types of evidence for macro evolution. If you wish to see an overview of 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution, click here. I can add that scientists do not like to use the terms microevolution and macroevolution since they are nebulous. These terms are more of a creationist thing. That’s why I been prefixing microevolution and macroevolution with “so called”.

Roughly a third of Americans believe the creationist claim that macroevolution is not possible, or that there is no evidence for it, even though we know that there is Strong evidence for macroevolution. Therefore, I consider this a super fact. Note, 97% of scientists support the theory of evolution. This is a brief Wikipedia article on evolution.

Note, this post is long, but if you are interested in it, you could just read a few instead of the evidences instead of all ten.

Speciation is considered relative

It is often said that two animals belong to the same species if they can interbreed in nature and produce viable, fertile offspring. However, it is not that simple.

An animal A may be able to successfully interbreed with an animal B, and that animal B may be able to successfully interbreed with an animal C, but animal A and C cannot interbreed. Animal A could be said to be a different species relative to animal C, but animal B could be said to be the same species as both animal A & C using the definition above. A great geography related example of this is ring species. In a ring species, gene flow occurs between neighboring populations of a species, but at the ends of the ring the populations don’t interbreed.

The picture depicts different subspecies as little colored circles centered around a big lake. The color changes a little bit at the time. All the circles next to each other can interbreed. | There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution — Illustration of ring species, an example of how speciation can be relative. All the circles next to each other can interbreed but at the end it no longer works. Andrew Z. Colvin, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Next up are ten selected types of evidence for Macroevolution in no particular order.

The Fossil Record Show an Evolution from Simple to Complex Species

The fossil record is quite extensive and represents 250,000 different species, but it is very far from complete. That is expected. Fossilization is an extremely rare event, and fossils are hard to find. Among the 250,000 fossils from different species there are no Precambrian rabbits or Mesozoic human fossils. If there were, that would have falsified evolution and been evidence for a creator. This example shows first of all that the theory of evolution is falsifiable (all scientific theories have to be falsifiable) contrary to some creationist claims and it constitutes a form of evidence for evolution.

If evolution is true then a scan through the entire sequence of rock strata should show early life to be quite simple, with more complex species appearing only after some time. In addition, the youngest fossils should be those that are most similar to living species. The fact that this is the case is strong evidence for evolution, specifically macroevolution. You can read more about this in this relatively short book, The Evidence for Evolution, by Alan R. Rogers.

A photo of a trilobite fossil. — The fossil record is a lot more solid and much less problematic than the creationist books I have read claimed. Shutter Stock Photo ID: 1323000239 by Alizada Studios

We can Follow Lineages in the Fossil Record

In the fossil record we can also follow lineages; species of animals and plants changing into something different over time. The fossil records show fish changing into amphibians, reptiles changing into mammals, dinosaurs into birds, artiodactyl like mammals into whales, apes into humans, etc. Creationists used to mock the fact that there were no transitional fossils between land mammals and whales and then they found Pakicetus in 1983 and then a lot more. As time passes the more transitional fossils we find.

The Archaeopteryx is embedded in stone with details of the skeleton with skull and bones. — Closeup of fossilized scary petrified Archaeopteryx transitional fossil between dinosaur and modern birds remains. Shutterstock Asset id: 1913076019 by Natalia van D.

The fact that we can follow lineages and that they are consistent with the various dating methods is powerful evidence for evolution. Dating methods include radiometric dating methods (uranium-lead, potassium-argon, carbon-14), and sequencing and superposition, and conditions encoded in fossils such as the length of the day (varied throughout natural history) and more. To read more about dating methods and how we know Earth is billions of years old click here. The picture below illustrates the skull changes of hominids by time.

15 skulls for different hominid species are shown as well as the relations between the species. | There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution — Homo skull changes of hominids from Wikipedia<>. SimplisticReps, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Molecular Biology and DNA

Molecular biology and DNA may be our best evidence for macroevolution. Our understanding of DNA has greatly increased over the last couple of decades. The human genome has been sequenced along with that of many other species, and we are able to compare the DNA and the genes of various species, and trace origins.

Man geneticist. Doctor sits at table in genetic laboratory. Chains of DNA or RNA. Sequencing human genome. Doctor studies DNA. Geneticist conducts scientific experiments Geneticist looks at test tubes. | There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution — Geneticist sequencing human genome Asset id: 2479929725 by FOTOGRIN

Of special interest are pseudo genes, the millions of transposable elements (transposons and retroelements) as well as useless sequences, introns. These segments are especially interesting because they are unaffected by natural selection and therefore mutations pile up in them at a fairly constant rate. By comparing two such segments in two species we can tell how far the species are apart and even how far back in time their common ancestor lived.

Based on the similarity in transposons we know that the closest related living animals to whales and dolphins (outside their order) are Hippopotamus, which confirms what we know from the fossil record of whales and the mammals that whales evolved from. Whales and Hippopotamus have a common ancestor and since we’ve found dozens of intermediate fossils between land mammals and whales, the evolution of whales is no longer a mystery.

This graph shows pictures of a sperm whale, gray whale and hippopotamus on the right, and two whale ancestors at the top and they are connected via lines ultimately showing the common connection point on the far left. — All living cetaceans including whales, dolphins, porpoises, sperm whales and hippopotamids / hippopotamus belong to a suborder of artiodactyls called whippomorpha. Hippopotamus and whales have a common ancestor. Note: I created this image by inserting a few pictures from Wikipedia commons including a mother sperm whale and her calf off the coast of Mauritius, a gray whale in captivity, a hippopotamus and two pre-historic whales (from the section Evolution of Whales – Intermediate Fossils).

Based on the similarity in transposons, pseudo genes, and genes in general (all of the genome) we know that the closest related living animals to humans are chimpanzees and bonobos. In fact, chimpanzees and humans are more closely related than chimpanzees and the other great apes. Based on the genetic record chimpanzees are no longer classified as great apes but as Hominini together with humans. Also based on the genetic record we know that chimpanzees and humans had a common ancestor that lived about six million years ago. The fossil for this common ancestor has not been found, but the information in the DNA can often tell us more than the fossil record.

The pictures show the set of the human 46 chromosomes on the left and the set of the chimpanzee 48 chromosomes on the right. The chromosomes look very similar between the two species, except human chromosome 2 which is split into chromosome 2A and 2B in the chimpanzee. — Comparison between human and chimpanzee karyotypes isolated on background. Shutterstock Asset id: 2432966649 by kanyanat wongsa.

The picture is a graph that shows that gorillas, chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor with orangutans. In turn bonobos, chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor with gorillas and finally chimpanzees and bonobos share a common ancestor with humans. | There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution — Evolution of humans via phylogenetics and differentiation between humans, chimpanzees, and other primates. Shutterstock Asset id: 2448150743 by kanyanat wongsa.

At the bottom of the cladogram is a box that says “hominin ancestor. A tree branches off from this box. On the left is a chimpanzee and the right a tree for seven hominin species including modern humans.” — Simple cladogram showing evolution of modern man from Hominid Ancestor Shutterstock Asset id: 2093535535 by CLOUD-WALKER.

The book Relics of Eden, the powerful evidence of evolution in human DNA by Daniel Fairbanks is good fairly in depth book on this topic.

Biogeography

Biogeographic evidence for evolution / macroevolution is among the oldest types of evidence (Charles Darwin used it) and yet it is very powerful. Biogeographic evidence for evolution shows that species’ geographic distributions result from descent with modification and environmental adaptation, rather than just similar habitats. Key types of biogeographic evidence for macroevolution include species existing only on a certain island, adaptive radiation (e.g., Galápagos finches), tectonic-driven species distribution (e.g., marsupials), and convergent evolution of unrelated species in similar environments.

The picture shows an island with an ancestral finch on the left and multiple other species of finch on the right all feeding on different things. — Adaptive radiation is a rapid evolutionary process where an ancestral species diversifies into a multitude of new species (or subspecies) to fill vacant ecological niches. Shutterstock Asset id: 2707584123 by VectorMine.

One example of biogeographical evidence for macroevolution is with so called oceanic islands. Oceanic islands are not part of a continent but are formed from the sea bottom typically through volcanic activity. Oceanic islands lack native freshwater fish and amphibians, and they rarely harbor native mammals and reptiles. However, freshwater fish, amphibians, mammals and reptiles thrive when introduced to oceanic islands. It’s just that they have to get there in the first place.

Instead, oceanic islands typically feature birds, insects, and plants that can more easily spread long distances. In addition, the species on oceanic islands are typically closely related and appear in relatively few groups. Add the fact that the species on oceanic islands resemble species on nearby continents but they are not the same. This strongly supports the narrative that some species from nearby continents migrated to newly formed oceanic islands and evolved.

The evidence gets even better if you look in more detail. For example, the Hawaiian Islands (oceanic islands) were formed in chronological order from west to east, as the divide between the continental shelves moved. The species on the different islands show a gradual transition in their physical properties and in their DNA as you go from west to east. This supports the narrative that the species hopped from one island to the next as the islands emerged, and then they evolved.

Comparative Anatomy

Similar anatomical structures in different species, such as the similar bone structure in a human arm, a bat wing, and a whale flipper indicate shared ancestry. Another is the heart structures in fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals which show a homologous progression of development.

Embryology

Different species share similar developmental stages. For example, early embryos of reptiles, birds, and mammals, including humans, develop pharyngeal pouches that are similar to fish gills. Baleen whale embryos have teeth that are lost by birth, human embryos develop a tail that are later lost, and human fetuses develop hair around week 16-20 that is usually lost but remain on premature babies. The development of embryos goes through stages of similar embryos of fish, then amphibians, reptiles, and then mammals.

Suboptimality

There is a lot of evidence based on so called suboptimality. Our bodies and that of other animals are full of imperfections that make perfect sense from an evolutionary perspective but not much sense if we were created by a creator. One example is the “vas deference”, which follow a circuitous route from the testis up and around the ureter and back down to the penis, instead of going straight to the penis. As the testis gradually moved from inside our bodies (as it was in fish) to the outside, vas deference got stuck around the ureter like a water hose can get stuck around a tree. This makes perfect sense from an evolutionary perspective.

Vestigial Structures

Vestigial structures are non-functional anatomical features, organs, or behaviors that were functional in a species’ ancestors but have lost most or all of their original purpose through evolution. Examples include the whale hind legs, flightless bird wings, the human appendix, the tailbone, wisdom teeth, and goosebumps in humans.

Atavisms

Atavisms are rare reappearances of a lost ancestral trait in an individual. This could happen because ancestral genes are preserved but suppressed but, for example, a mutation allows the gene to be expressed. Examples include a human baby born with a tail, a snake with limbs or a chicken with teeth, dolphins with back flippers, or teeth in chickens. It is rare but evidence for evolution.

Traces of Common Descent

Traces of common descent in species, for example, homologous anatomical structures, similar embryological development, shared genetic codes, and phylogenetic mapping allows the construction of the tree of life. Phylogenetic mapping suggests that organisms inherited fundamental traits from a common ancestor. All life except viruses can be traced back to a common ancestor that lived 4.2 billion years ago. This also constitutes evidence for evolution / macroevolution.

The picture shows how the three domains of life bacteria, archaea, eukaryote, and the relationships between the different phylum in each domain leads back to LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor). | There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution — User: Crion, CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Artificial Intelligence is Not New

Superfact 88: The history of artificial intelligence (AI) began in antiquity, with stories of artificial beings. The first artificial neural network model was created in 1943. The Turing test was created in 1950. The field of “Artificial Intelligence Research” was founded as an academic discipline in 1956. The first trainable (able to learn) neural network was demonstrated in 1957.

Since then, artificial intelligence has come a long way. Did you hear about the computer that defeated the reigning world champion in chess? A computer finally defeated the supreme human intellect in the world in an intellectual field. Is this the end of humanity? Oh, wait, that was in 1997.

White female AI robot using a microscope in the scientific laboratory. | Artificial Intelligence is Not New — Artificial intelligence and research concept. Shutterstock Asset id: 2314449325 by Stock-Asso

The various recent launches of large language models such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Llama, Deep Seek, etc., have impressed many people but also fooled many people into thinking that Artificial Intelligence is a new invention. It is not. Artificial Intelligence has been around for a long time, and its past is filled with many success stories as well as disappointments. Click here to see a timeline for Artificial Intelligence stretching from antiquity to 2025. For additional sources click here, here, here, or here.

I consider this a super fact because it is true, kind of important, and based on my personal experience I believe that the long old history of Artificial Intelligence is a surprise to many.

My Personal Experience with Artificial Intelligence

In 1986, when I was in college in Sweden, I took a class in the LISP programming language. LISP was the first Artificial Intelligence programming language, and it was invented in 1958. In 1987, as a university level exchange student, I took a class called Artificial Intelligence at Case Western Reserve University. The book we used was Artificial Intelligence by Elaine Rich published in 1983. This book and the course were focused on decision trees and rule based algorithms and did not even mention neural networks.

That same year I also took a class called Pattern Recognition which introduced neural networks to me. In 1986 a landmark paper was published by David Rumelhart, Geoffrey Hinton, and Ronald Williams which introduced the Rumelhart backpropagation algorithm. Geoffrey Hinton received the Nobel Prize in physics in 2024. David Rumelhart and Ronald Williams were both dead and could therefore not receive the Nobel Prize. The Nobel Prize was also given to John J. Hopfield, another pioneer in neural networks. He invented the Hopfield network. You can read more about neural networks and the Nobel Prize in physics in 2024 here.

The Rumelhart backpropagation algorithm was a giant leap forward for neural networks and for Artificial Intelligence and it is the algorithm used by ChatGPT and the other large language models. Geoffrey Hinton is often interviewed in media and often presented as the father of Artificial Intelligence. He is not, but he is responsible for arguably the greatest leap forward in neural networks, as well as Artificial Intelligence.

In class we used the Rumelhart backpropagation algorithm to read images with text. It is one thing to type in a character on a keyboard and quite another to have a computer identify a character in an image. We trained our primitive neural networks to recognize images of letters using the Rumelhart backpropagation algorithm. We coded the backpropagation algorithm using the C programming language over perhaps 100 neurons/parameters and a few hundred synapses/weights (in AI). It worked pretty well. In comparison, ChatGPT 4 is estimated to have 1 trillion neurons/parameters. Our class was among the first in the world to try out this, at the time, new algorithm and at the time I did not realize the importance of it.

Later I did research and I worked in the field of Robotics where I implemented various Artificial Intelligence algorithms but not neural networks. I have a PhD in Applied Physics and Electrical Engineering with specialty in Robotics. At my next workplace Siemens I used decision tree algorithms, also Artificial Intelligence but not neural networks.

What is a Neural Network

Three blue circles connected to two red circles via lines assigned weights. — A simple old-style 1950’s Neural Network (my drawing)

The first neural networks created by Frank Rosenblatt in 1957 looked like the one above. You had input neurons and output neurons connected via weights that you adjusted using an algorithm. In the case above you have three inputs (2, 0, 3) and these inputs are multiplied by the weights to the outputs. 3 X 0.2 +0 + 2 X -0.25 = 0.1 and 3 X 0.4 + 0 + 2 X 0.1 = 1.4 and then each output node has a threshold function yielding outputs 0 and 1.

To train the network you create a set of inputs and the output that you want for each input. You pick some random weights and then you can calculate the total error you get, and you use the error to calculate a new set of weights. You do this over and over until you get the output you want for the different inputs. The amazing thing is that now the neural network will often also give you the desired output for an input that you have not used in the training. Unfortunately, these neural networks weren’t very good, and they sometimes could not even be trained.

As mentioned, in 1986, Geoffrey Hinton, David Rumelhart and Ronald J. Williams presented the Rumelhart backward propagation algorithm which were applied to a neural network featuring a hidden layer (at least one hidden layer). It was effective and it was guaranteed to learn patterns that were possible to learn. It set off a revolution in Neural Networks. In the network below you also use the errors in a similar fashion as in the Rosenblatt network. However, the combination of a hidden layer and the backpropagation algorithm make a huge difference.

Three blue circles connected to four yellow circles connected to two red circles all via lines assigned weights. — A multiple layer neural network with one hidden layer. This set-up and the associated backpropagation algorithm set off the neural network revolution. My drawing.

Below I am showing two 10 X 10 pixel images containing the letter F. The neural network I created in class (see above) had 100 inputs, one for each pixel, a hidden layer and then output neurons corresponding to each letter I wanted to read. I think I used about 10 or 20 versions of each letter during training, by which I mean running the algorithm to adjust the weights to minimize the error until it is almost gone. Now if I used an image with a letter that I had never used before, the neural network typically got it right even though the image was new.

The 10 X 10 pixel images are filled with black pixels resembling two differently looking characters F | Artificial Intelligence is Not New — Two examples of the letter F in a 10 X 10 image. You can use these images (100 input neurons) to train a neural network to recognize the letters F.

At first, it was believed that adding more than one hidden layer did not add much. That was until it was discovered that by applying the backpropagation algorithm differently to different layers created a better / smarter neural network and so at the beginning of this century the deep learning neural networks were born (or just deep learning AI). I can add that our Nobel Prize winner Geoffrey J. Hinton was also a pioneer in deep learning neural networks.

Three blue circles connected to four yellow circles connected to four green circles connected to six blue circles connected to two red circles all via lines representing weights. — My drawing of a deep learning neural network (deep learning AI). There are three hidden layers.

I should mention that there are many styles of neural networks, not just the ones I’ve shown here. Below is a network called a Hopfield network (it was certainly not the only thing he discovered).

Four neurons that are all connected to each other. — In a Hopfield network all neurons are input, and output neurons and they are all connected to each other.

For your information, ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 are deep learning neural networks, like the one in my colorful picture above, but instead of 3 hidden layers it has 96 hidden layers in its neural network and instead of 19 neurons it has a total of 176 billion neurons.

Note on potential harm of AI

The potential harm of AI is a related and important topic that I did not address. However, this is already a very long and complex post, and I don’t know enough about this topic (yet). To read more about this topic check the comments made by “Grant at Tame Your Book” (in comment section).

To see the Other Super Facts click here

Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy

Superfact 87: Wind energy is a clean, renewable, and sustainable power source that produces no atmospheric emissions or water pollution during operation. Manufacturing and installation have a small carbon footprint that is much smaller than the carbon footprint of the fossil fuels they potentially replace.

There is a lot of disinformation being spread about wind power. One recent example is the TV series Landman which presents demonstrably false claims as facts. In Texas where I live the problem with deceitful anti-renewable propaganda is especially severe. It is important to check with reputable sources before you believe what you come across. Wind energy is not 100% clean and not without issues but it is much safer and cleaner than the fossil fuels they potentially replace. Below is a two minute video that explains this.

The graph below from Our World in Data depicting lifetime greenhouse gas emissions (construction, operation, disposal) show that the lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of coal power are 88 times higher than those of wind power and kill 615 times as many people as wind power. The lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of natural gas are 40 times higher than those of wind power and kill 460 times as many people as wind power. The difference is staggering. When someone tells you that there’s nothing clean about wind power, they are not just lying to you, they are lying very big.

In the graph below, greenhouse gas emissions is measured of CO2 equivalents per Gigawatt-hour of electricity over the lifecycle of the power plant. 1 Gigawatt-hour is the annual electricity consumption of 150 people in the EU. Death rate from accidents and air pollution is measured as deaths per Terawatt hour of electricity production. 1 terawatt hour is the annual electricity consumption of 150,000 people in the EU.

The graph depicts death rates and greenhouse gas emissions per unit for different energy sources including coal, oil, natural gas, biomass, hydropower, wind, nuclear power, and solar. — Death rates from fossil fuels and biomass are based on state-of-the art plants with pollution control in Europe and are based on older models of the impacts of air pollution on health. This means these death rates are likely to be very conservative. For further discussion see our article: OurWorldinData.org/safest-sources-of-energy. Electricity shares are given for 2021. Data sources: Markandya & Wilkinson (2007); UNSCEAR (2008: 2018); Sovacol et al. (2016); IPCC AR5 (2014); UNECE (2022); Ember Energy (2001). OurWorldinData.org – Research and data to make progress against the world’s largest problems. Licensed under CC-BY by the authors Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser. Citation : Hannah Ritchie (2020) – “What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy?” Published online at OurWorldinData.org. Retrieved from: ‘https://archive.ourworldindata.org/20260202-100556/safest-sources-of-energy.html’ [Online Resource] (archived on February 2, 2026).

As you can see wind power is safe and emits very little greenhouse gases over its lifetime. In addition, there is no water impact associated with the operation of wind turbines, but a relatively small amount is used in manufacturing. There are other issues with land use, sounds, rare earth mining, waste, and effects on wildlife particularly birds.

However, these issues are in general smaller than depicted must be compared to issues with the fossil fuels they replace. For example, 15 billion tons of fossil fuels (including 9 billion tons of coal) are mined every year and burned whilst the annual mining for all clean energy technologies is around 7 million tons (2,000 times less). More about birds in the next section. Overall wind energy is a clean, renewable, and a sustainable power source. You can read more about this here, here, here, or here.

I am referring to this fact as a super fact because, it is true, an important topic, and yet it’s a fact that is difficult for many people to believe. Too much misinformation has been spread about wind power. I expect some people to dismiss this fact out of hand. But that is the point of super facts, they are true but hard to believe for many, or surprising, and perhaps even shocking.

Wind power saves a lot more birds than it kills

It may come as a surprise to some, but wind power is not a major cause of bird death. Wind farms are estimated to be responsible for losing less than 0.4 birds per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity generated, compared to over 5 birds per GWh for fossil fueled power stations. This means that replacing fossil fuels with wind power saves a lot more birds than wind power turbines take. In addition, cats, windows, cars, poison and powerlines are examples of things that kill a lot more birds than wind power does. Cats kill thousands of times more birds than wind power does, and this usually does not bother us. Note I love both dogs and cats.

It is difficult to make exact estimates of bird deaths but below are some interesting graphs from reputable sources, confirmed by many other studies and analysis, such as this overview from MIT and this analysis by Hannah Richie. The numbers aren’t the same, but they make the same point. You can read more about this here.

The graph shows that Wind Turbines kill 328,000 birds per year in the US, Electrocutions kill 6,250,000 birds, Collisions with powerlines kill 32,500,000 birds, Poison kills 72,000,000 birds, Vehicle collisions kill 214,500,000 birds, Collisions with glass kill 676,500,000 birds, and cats kill 1,850,700,000 birds per year in the US. — From Wikipedia: Universiteit van Nederland, CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Bar graph showing cats killing an estimated 2,400 million birds per year, buildings killing an estimated 599 million birds per year, automobiles killing an estimated 200 million birds per year, pesticides killing an estimated 67 million birds per year, powerlines killing an estimated 28 million birds per year, communication towers killing an estimated 6.6 million birds per year, and wind turbines killing an estimated 1.2 million birds per year. | Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy — An alternative graph taken from Hannah Richie / Our World in Data, using alternative sources essentially showing the same thing. Sources: Loss et al. (2015), (2013), US Fish and Wildlife Service; Subramnayan et al. (2012), American Bird Conservancy (2021).

That does not mean we shouldn’t do our best to reduce bird deaths from wind power stations. However, don’t fall for the misinformation that is trying to paint it is a big problem specifically for wind power.

Wind power turbines by the seashore. The sun is setting. | Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy — Photo from pexels.com

Wind Power is Inexpensive

Finally, a bit of a deviation from the main topic. In addition to being a relatively clean, renewable, and sustainable power source, wind power is now relatively cheap, which explains its recent success around the world. I am bringing this up because another widespread myth about wind power is that it is expensive and wouldn’t survive without subsidies.

Practically all energy sources are subsidized, and fossil fuels have a long history of government subsidies. Below is the average unsubsidized levelized cost of energy according to Lazard. Levelized means that construction costs, land rent, and other costs not directly caused by electricity generation are taken into consideration. Notice how cheap wind is (blue line). This graph is for the United States.

The image shows 8 graphs representing the price of Nuclear, Gas (peaker), Thermal Solar, Coal, Geothermal, Natural Gas, Solar Panels, and Wind. Today Wind is the cheapest. — Average unsubsidized levelized cost of energy. Notice that the light blue line indicates that wind power is pretty cheap. Mir-445511, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Windpower is not only relatively cheap. Wind power is one of the most efficient and sustainable energy sources available. The energy required to manufacture, install, and maintain wind turbines is small compared to the energy they produce over their lifespan. This is known as their energy return on investment (EROI), which is quite favorable for wind energy. The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) states that the average wind farm will pay back the energy that was used in its manufacture within 3-5 months of operation. This article in the journal Renewable Energy found that the average windfarm produces 20-25 times more energy during its operational life than was used to construct and install its turbines. It included data from 119 turbines across 50 sites going back 30 years.

It is important to be aware that there are many false claims floating around about wind power. The sound from wind power stations does not cause cancer, it does not use any other energy sources while operating; it solely harnesses the kinetic energy from the wind to generate electricity, meaning it only relies on wind to function as its primary energy source. Windpower is not a major cause if bird deaths. To read more about false claims about wind power click here.

Conclusion

There are positive and negative aspects of wind power, like any other source of energy. One issue with wind power (and solar) is that it is an intermittent source of energy. When the wind is not blowing you need other sources of energy (until there is sufficient energy storage). This is less of a problem when you have a mix of energy sources and in practice it has not been a big problem so far. However, what we know is that Wind Energy is indeed clean energy, much cleaner than the fossil fuels they potentially replace, and also relatively cheap, even without subsidies.

Early Homo Sapiens lived at the same time as many other human species

Super fact 86 : Early humans, early homo sapiens, lived at the same time as many other human species including Neanderthals, Denisovans, Homo floresiensis, Homo naledi, Homo luzonensis. Homo heidelbergensis, Homo erectus, and maybe other species as well.

Homo sapiens co-existed with several other Homo species. Homo erectus and Homo heidelbergensis are direct ancestors to Homo sapiens that survived long enough to exist at the same time as Homo sapiens.

Homo sapiens emerged around 300,000 years ago in Africa and Homo erectus died out around 100,000 years ago and Homo heidelbergensis died out around 200,000 years ago. Homo floresiensis died out 50,000 years ago, the most recent Homo luzonensis is 50,000 years old but they may have survived longer, Homo naledi existed approximately 335,000 to 236,000 years ago, Neanderthals interbred with homo sapiens and died out around 40,000 years ago, the Denisovans also interbred with homo sapiens and died out around 30,000 to 50,000 years ago. You can read more here and here.

You may wonder how different species can interbreed with each other. More on that later in this post.

I consider this a super fact because it is true, surprising to those who did not know this, and ancient human history is kind of important. Even if you knew that homo sapiens lived along other homo species the fact that the world used to be so crowded with different homo species may come as a surprise. Where did they all go?

Direct Ancestors of Homo Sapiens

Homo heidelbergensis is widely considered a pivotal common ancestor to Homo sapiens, Neanderthals, and Denisovans. Since Homo Erectus is a direct ancestor to Homo heidelbergensis it is also a direct ancestor to Homo sapiens, Neanderthals, and Denisovans. Homo Erectus is also a direct ancestor to Homo floresiensis but Homo heidelbergensis is not considered an ancestor to Homo floresiensis. The picture below shows the direct ancestors to Homo Sapiens.

The skulls are from left to right Australopithecus africanus 3.3 - 2 million years ago, Homo habilis 2.4 to 1.5 million years ago, Homo erectus 1.6 to 600 thousand years ago, Homo heidelbergensis 700 thousand to 200 thousand years ago, early homo sapiens 300 thousand to 45 thousand years ago, anatomically modern human 130 thousand years ago until now. — Skulls of successive (or near-successive, depending on the source) human evolutionary ancestors, up until ‘modern’ Homo sapiens. Mya – million years ago, kya – thousand years ago. SimplisticReps, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.

Geographic spread of Homo Sapiens and other Homo Species

Homo heidelbergensis is an ancestor to Neanderthals, Denisovans and Homo sapiens (and Homo erectus is an ancestor to Homo heidelbergensis). However, whilst Neanderthals emerged in Europe and Asia, Denisovans evolved in Asia, and Homo sapiens emerged in Africa.

The map shows the movement of Homo heidelbergensis originating in Africa and moving into Europe and Asia with Neanderthals (in yellow) emerging in Europe and moving into Asia. The Denisovans emerged in Asia and spread further east. | Early Homo Sapiens lived at the same time as many other human species — The evolution and geographic spread of Denisovans as compared with Neanderthals, Homo heidelbergensis and Homo erectus. John D. Croft at English Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The map below indicates where skeleton remains of Neanderthals had been found as of 2017.

This map of Europe and West Asia shows the region where Neanderthals have been found. — Known Neanderthal range in Europe (blue), Southwest Asia (orange), Uzbekistan (green), and the Altai mountains (violet), as inferred by their skeletal remains (not stone tools). There were 165 such places by 2017. Nilenbert, N. Perrault, auteur du guide complet du canotageI, CC BY-SA 3.0 <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/>, via Wikimedia Commons.

Interbreeding and Defining a Species

Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens (or Homo Sapiens Sapiens) interbred, and so did Homo Denisova and Homo Sapiens, and Homo Neanderthalensis interbred with Homo Denisova. What a mess! Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens were different species, so it may seem strange that they could interbreed. However, species is a complex concept.

Speciation is considered relative. It is often said that two animals belong to the same species if they can interbreed in nature and produce viable, fertile offspring. However, it is not that simple. An animal A may be able to successfully interbreed with an animal B, and that animal B may be able to successfully interbreed with an animal C, but animal A and C cannot interbreed. Animal A could be said to be a different species relative to animal C but animal B could be said to be the same species as both animal A & C. A great geography related example of this is ring species. In a ring species, gene flow occurs between neighboring populations of a species, but at the ends of the ring the populations don’t interbreed.

For the case of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens (and Denisovans); at certain points in history, you could consider Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens to be different subspecies rather than different species. That is why you sometimes hear the terms Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens Sapiens. I can add that Homo sapiens certainly got around, as you can see on the map below.

A world map showing portions of Africa being yellow and red, and portions of Asia being yellow and dark yellow with red arrows representing migrating Homo Sapiens. The map features several time markers representing the arrival of Homo Sapiens. | Early Homo Sapiens lived at the same time as many other human species — The spread of Homo Erectus (yellow), Homo Sapiens (red) and Homo Neanderthalensis (dark yellow). NordNordWest, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Is Thomas Wikman a Neanderthal ?

I can add that genetic testing can reveal how much Neanderthal DNA you have. I took a test with 23AndMe to find out about my ancestry (it was 98% Scandinavian and Finnish) and to find out about my risk for genetic illnesses. 23AndMe also told me that I was in the 99 percentiles with respect to carrying Neanderthal genes, meaning that I had unusually many Neanderthal genes. I joined the 23AndMe Neanderthal club (you had to be in the 98 percentile).

However, I quit after people in the club started saying that we should demand reparations from those with less Neanderthal genes because they exterminated us. It might have been a bizarre joke, but I decided not to stay around to find out. Later, after 23AndMe went bankrupt, I deleted mine and my wife’s data and quit. I was afraid 23AndMe might sell the DNA data to health insurance companies.

This is some other evolution and natural history related posts

To see the other Super Facts click here

Birds are Avian Dinosaurs

Super fact 84 : Modern birds are classified as part of the clade Dinosauria. They are direct descendants of small, feathered maniraptoran dinosaurs that survived the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago. Maniraptoran dinosaurs in turn are a major subgroup of coelurosaurian theropod dinosaurs. In other words, birds are avian dinosaurs.

Birds are descendants of specialized maniraptoran theropod dinosaurs that survived the extinction event that killed most dinosaurs 66 million years ago. Maniraptoran dinosaurs in turn are a major subgroup of Tyrannoraptora, which include the well-known Tyrannosaurus Rex. Tyrannoraptora in turn is a major subgroup of coelurosaurian theropod dinosaurs. Both the well-known dinosaur called velociraptor, and birds belong to the group Maniraptora. Even though the velociraptor was not a bird they shared many bird-like features, including feathers, wishbones, hollow bones, and similar wrist joints.

A colorful velociraptor covered in feather. It does not look like it could fly. — Velociraptor with feathers (well a little bit). Shutterstock Asset id: 2636534673 by Shutterstock AI Generator

Birds evolved during the Jurassic period from two-legged, carnivorous, and often feathered dinosaurs, and are the only surviving dinosaurs. They have been classified as avian dinosaurs since the 1980’s. In other words, they are dinosaurs. Initially feathers evolved among dinosaurs for insulation, sexual display, and camouflage rather than flight. One of the early birds was Eoconfuciusornis. It lived 131 million years ago, long before the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago. Eoconfuciusornis could fly and it had colorful feathers.

A black bird with a long retrix / tail sitting on a tree. | Eoconfuciusornis 130 million years ago. | Birds are Avian Dinosaurs — Eoconfuciusornis 130 million years ago. Nobu Tamura, CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

I brought up this fact in a recent post and I hinted that it was a super fact. It is true, surprising and kind of important. After all birds are all around us. In this post I am exploring the fact that birds are dinosaurs a little bit more than I did in my previous post. Below are a couple of modern birds.

A shoebill stork is a large gray-blue bird with a huge beak. — A shoebill stork standing at Ueno Zoo, Tokyo, five feet tall. Bob Owen, CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

A taxidermy mount of a turkey standing on our dining room table. | Birds are Avian Dinosaurs — A wild turkey in our dining room.

Feathered Dinosaurs

A lot of dinosaurs had feathers, and some could fly. That included many types of dinosaurs other than birds. Dinosaurs with feathers include, for example, Velociraptor, Deinonychus, Archaeopteryx (could fly), Microraptor (could fly), Rahonavis (could fly), Gallimimus, Ornithomimus, Yutyrannus huali, Psittacosaurus, Psittacosaurus, Sinosauropteryx, Sinornithosaurus, Eoconfuciusornis, Wulong, Psittacosaurus, Sciurumimus, Kulindadromeus, Caudipteryx, Utahraptor, Deinonychus, and even young T-Rex and many others. We know that at least some dinosaurs had feathers as well as colors based on fossil finds. Below are some illustrations.

A Gallimimus dinosaur covered in hair and feathers. — Life restoration showing an adult with feathers, based on those known from the related Ornithomimus. Picture is from here. PaleoNeolitic, CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

A bird like dinosaur with feathers. It has huge claws. — Life restoration of Pyroraptor olympius. Picture is from here. Mette Aumala, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Birds are Avian Dinosaurs | Reconstruction of the 2014 microraptorine dromaeosaur dinosaur, Changyuraptor yangi. This is a dinosaur with four wings. — Reconstruction of the 2014 microraptorine dromaeosaur dinosaur, Changyuraptor yangi. This is a dinosaur with four wings. The picture is taken from here. Emily Willoughby (e.deinonychus@gmail.com, http://emilywilloughby.com), CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

Greyish bird like creature with a reptile like head. — Artistic restoration of D. albertensis Artistic restoration of D. albertensis. Picture from here. Fred Wierum, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

Six dromaeosaurs are shown, all covered with feathers. Microraptor gui (flying), Velociraptor mongoliensis, Austroraptor cabazai, Dromaeosaurus albertensis, Utahraptor ostrommaysorum, Deinonychus antirrhopus. A human is shown on the left. Most of the dinosaurs are bigger than the human. — Size of *Utahraptor* (5) compared with other dromaeosaurs and a human. It is the biggest one in the picture. The picture is from here. Fred Wierum, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.

Terror Birds and Other Giant Birds

After the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago birds continued evolving. Some of them became large standing 1 – 3 meters (3-10 feet) and weighing hundreds or even thousands of pounds. From about 53 million years ago until 100,000 years ago there were large birds that we refer to as Terror Birds. They lived at the same time as humans. However, there were other large and scary birds. Dromornis stirtoni was a flightless bird that lived 7-8 million years ago, it was over three meters in height (10 feet) and weighed 500-600 kilograms (1,100 to 1,300 pounds). Below are some illustrations.

pencil drawing, digital coloring of Paraphysornis brasiliensis, a Terror Bird. | Birds are Avian Dinosaurs — Paraphysornis brasiliensis, a Terror Bird, 8 feet tall weighing 400–530 pounds, this is a terror bird from the Early Miocene of Brazil,: Snowmanradio (talk)Paraphysornis_BW.jpg: Nobu Tamura (http://spinops.blogspot.com), CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Kelenken, Devincenzia, Phorusrhacos, and Titanis birds are all larger than the human standing on the left hand side. Kelenken guillermoi is the largest. — Size comparison of some phorusrhacids (Terror Birds), including Kelenken, Devincenzia, Phorusrhacos, and Titanis. Picture taken from here. PaleoNeolitic, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.

A flightless bird with huge yellow beak. | Birds are Avian Dinosaurs — A pencil-drawn reconstruction of Dromornis stirtoni. Picture is taken from here. Nobu Tamura (http://spinops.blogspot.de), CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/, via Wikimedia Commons

Category: Super fact

There is Strong Evidence for Macroevolution

Speciation is considered relative

The Fossil Record Show an Evolution from Simple to Complex Species

We can Follow Lineages in the Fossil Record

Molecular Biology and DNA

Biogeography

Comparative Anatomy

Embryology

Suboptimality

Vestigial Structures

Atavisms

Traces of Common Descent

Other Evolution Related Super Fact Posts

To see the Other Super Facts click here

Artificial Intelligence is Not New

My Personal Experience with Artificial Intelligence

What is a Neural Network

Note on potential harm of AI

To see the Other Super Facts click here

Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy

Wind power saves a lot more birds than it kills

Wind Power is Inexpensive

Conclusion

Other Posts by Me Related to Wind Power

To see the Other Super Facts click here

Early Homo Sapiens lived at the same time as many other human species

Direct Ancestors of Homo Sapiens

Geographic spread of Homo Sapiens and other Homo Species

Interbreeding and Defining a Species

Is Thomas Wikman a Neanderthal ?

This is some other evolution and natural history related posts

To see the other Super Facts click here

Birds are Avian Dinosaurs

Feathered Dinosaurs

Terror Birds and Other Giant Birds