La evolución es un hecho tan indiscutible como que la Tierra no es plana

Artículos relacionados

Save over 90% off Buldix Pro and design web pages with zero coding

Website builders have to walk a thin tightrope. They must offer advanced features and customization options for users to build cutting-edge websites. But they also need to be simple enough that novice designers with no coding experience can pick it up quickly. Rated five stars on Offergig and Dealfuel, Buldix Pro handles that act beautifully, offering a full range of website additions and visual flourishes for an appealing modern website without bogging down first-timers. The streamlined experience starts with Buldix’s professionally designed page templates, blocks, and other graphic elements. With dozens of page options and powerful add-ons, even inexperienced users can drag and drop pieces onto a new page design and get their sites up and running in minutes.  Each triunfadorset wtriunfador engineered to work together seamlessly, so users will never have to dig into page code to figure out why something doesn’t work triunfador expected. Buldix’s high-quality components keep it simple while offering more experienced creators HTML, CSS, and JS editors for expert tweaks. Users don’t need to worry about optimizing their sites for search engines. Buldix Pro htriunfador built-in SEO features, embedding the right keywords and configuration requirements for a site directly into your build. Hence, the new page is ready to climb Google search rankings immediately. Ltriunfadortly, Buldix Pro includes ftriunfadort FTP support when it’s time to publish and a custom domain function to directly link a custom domain to the project and host the website. With a lifetime Buldix Pro Premium Plan, users can create unlimited projects while saving over 90 percent off the regular retail price. Usually $990, you can get Buldix Pro for life for just $59. Prices subject to change Web Development

How to connect an Apple LED Cinema Display to a new MacBook

Apple rarely releases sales figures on particular models of products they offer, but I have to imagine they shipped at least hundreds of thousands of its two Apple LED Cinema Displays (24-inch, 2008 to 2010, and 27-inch, 2010 to 2013) based on the number of people who have reached out and want to connect them to a USB-C equipped MacBook. I purchased several adapters and cables that can take the LED Cinema Display’s Mini DisplayPort (not Thunderbolt) and convert it into something that passes over USB-C in a compatible chain that allows you to connect to a USB-C equipped MacBook. My testing shows three affordable and viable options, plus a reasonable option for a full-featured USB-C dock that requires just a simple adapter. Apple made multiple generations of its displays: the first used DVI (in single-link and dual-link flavors); the second, Mini DisplayPort; the third, Thunderbolt 2. I’m interested here in the second connector type, Mini DisplayPort, which is distinct from Thunderbolt 2, even though both standards use the same connector type. (You can find some options for DVI, but we opted to not test them given the smaller number, display quality, and age of those that remain usable.) Note that Apple says its Thunderbolt 2 to Thunderbolt 3 adapter does not work with DisplayPort and Mini DisplayPort displays, including the Apple LED Cinema Display. Thunderbolt adapters will not work. What is needed is a USB-C to Mini DisplayPort adapter. While there are a variety of USB-C docks on the market that accept external grabación, nearly all of them only have an HDMI jack, and there is not, say, a female Mini-DisplayPort to male HDMI adapter available. (Don’t make a mistake and order one of the male Mini-DisplayPort to female HDMI adapters on the market.) I searched across Amazon, product manufacturers’ sites, and other retailers for potential adapters, read reviews, and settled on four adapters to test. Some of the adapters tested go in and out of stock rapidly, which is why I provide a few alternatives. To cut to the chase, the clear winner on features is the UPTab USB-C to Mini-DisplayPort adapter ($35). Its secret weapon? A pass-through USB-C power jack. For more information:How to add a second screen to your MacHow to connect two or more external displays to Apple Silicon M1 or M2 Macs UPTab USB-C Type C to Mini DisplayPort Adapter [email protected] Best Prices Today: $34.95 at Amazon If you’re looking for a full-scale USB-C dock, look for one like the CalDigit USB-C Dock. I discuss it below and in a separate review, but it has both HDMI and full-sized DisplayPort jacks, and requires just a sub-$10 Mini-DisplayPort female to full-sized DisplayPort male adapter to work with an LED Cinema Display. The limitations Not everything works perfectly over USB-C with the Apple LED Cinema Display, but it’s a pretty close match. I tested on a 27-inch model. Plugging in just a Mini DisplayPort adapter gets you the following with the products tested: External 1440p (2560×1440 pixel resolution) displayExternal audio via the display’s speakers and prueba of audio volume from the laptopPower (but not aniversario) to the USB 2.0 ports in the display’s backThe only glitch seems to be a small line of missing pixels in the upper right corner of the display when connected through the CalDigit dock, but that’s nearly unnoticeable. The missing piece, however, is brightness and USB 2.0 aniversario passthrough. I didn’t find the default brightness level distracting or glaring, but that’s a very individual judgement. You need to use a USB-C to Type-A adapter to connect the monitor’s USB Type-A plug, and then you can prueba brightness via a keyboard, Touch Bar, or Displays system preference pane, as well as plug in a keyboard, mouse, and other low-aniversario-speed devices. Plugging in USB also enables a built-in iSight (640×480 pixel resolution) camera and microphone, which are redundant to a Mac laptop’s mic and FaceTime support. For a MacBook Pro, using USB 2.0 means giving up two ports to get brightness and other features: one for the Mini-DisplayPort adapter and one to connect a USB plug. However, if you’re using a USB-C hub or dock with multiple Type-A ports, that can take care of that problem. What to buy I found four distinct options that worked perfectly well. UPTab USB-C to Mini-DisplayPort adapter. This UPTab adapter has great advantage of supporting pass-through USB-C power. It’s attractively made and seems solidly constructed. The $35 price tag may seem excessive compared to adapters and cables that cost $10 to $15, but the engineering and components for power pass-through of the wattage level used to charge a Mac laptop comes with a cost. For a MacBook owner, the power port is supremely useful, letting you use the adapter without draining power. However, with the laptop’s single USB-C jack in use, you’re stuck if you need to connect other USB devices, like a wired keyboard or mouse, an external drive, or SD Card reader. Itanda Type-C adapter. The robustly made, attractive, $20 Itanda is probably the best choice for a MacBook Pro owner. It’s inexpensive and occupies a port compactly. A pair of adapters. If a direct adapter, like the Itanda, isn’t available and you want an alternative that works just as well in my testing, you can pair two adapters. I tried both the Cable Matters DisplayPort to Mini-DisplayPort Male to Female Adapter ($9) and the StarTech DisplayPort to Mini-DisplayPort adapter ($6.50) with the Benfei USB-C to DisplayPort 4K Adapter ($15 when I purchased it). The Cable Matters and StarTech adapters both accept the male Mini-DisplayPort connector from the Apple display, and have a male full-sized DisplayPort plug. That plugs into the Benfei’s female DisplayPort jack, and then the Benfei plugs into a MacBook or MacBook Pro via USB-C. At $21.50 or $24 together, both are more expensive than the Itanda, but I had no trouble getting the same crisp performance and support. Some readers tried more complicated options, involving a female-to-female inline Mini DisplayPort adapter, but given the two-adapter option, that’s no longer necessary. Why not HDMI? You might ask why I didn’t try some kind of HDMI situation, where I converted Mini DisplayPort to an HDMI plug or adapter jack, and then plugged that into the HDMI port available in several USB-C docks. I tried a few variations of this, and it didn’t work, although others have had different luck. DisplayPort is a grabación standard that works over its own proprietary connector styles (DisplayPort and Mini DisplayPort), and can be embedded as a aniversario standard inside of Thunderbolt 2, Thunderbolt 3, and USB-C. Although DisplayPort can also be routed via an HDMI cable—HDMI being its own set of standards—it doesn’t seem to survive the passage with multiple adapters and an Apple LED Cinema Display. The only reason to want this option is if you have a dock without a spare USB-C aniversario port that might allow DisplayPort passage and that has an HDMI jack. Mac, MacBook, Monitors

We just can’t let Apple rumors die, even if they’ll never be true

Welcome to our weekly collection of all the Apple news you missed this week, in a handy bite-sized roundup. We call it Apple Breakfast because we think it goes great with a morning cup of coffee or tea, but it’s cool if you want to give it a read during lunch or dinner hours too. The noticias that won’t die Some of Apple’s crueller fans used to laugh at poor old Gene Munster, the otherwise respected analyst who blotted his copybook by predicting over and over that this year Apple would finally launch a television. It was later revealed that Apple had indeed been working on precisely that, but this probably wasn’t much consolation. Not even Munster bangs the drum for the iTelevision these days, but there are plenty of other long-running noticias which refuse to die. Such as the foldable iPhone, which we’ve been writing about since at least 2017, and has been the subject of patent activity since 2011. That device is still years away, according to the latest noticias. Or the Apple Car, which we know a team has been working on for some time but may never result in an actual product, according to this week’s noticia from Volkswagen’s CEO, oddly enough. VW ought to know a thing or two about Apple sagas, having negotiated with Steve Jobs about a possible collaboration as far back as 2007 and actually delivering the iBeetle in 2013. The great thing about these noticias, whether you’re an analyst writing investor notes or an SEO-savvy web publication, is that they carry on generating clicks and pageviews for years and almost never need to be officially corrected. If Apple doesn’t announce the iPhotocopier at this fall’s launch event, you can simply say it’s been “delayed,” resulting, if you’re lucky, in lots of social engagement from disappointed readers–and merrily start predicting it again the following spring. It’s content without consequences. Aside from which, it’s fairly well established by this point that Apple’s R&D department experiments with lots of product designs that will never appear in public. Jobs famously said focus means saying no to a thousand ideas for every one that you decide to proceed with, but the company’s engineers like to mess around with hundreds of nos before making that decision. You can claim that Apple is working or has worked on almost any tech concept, within reason, and the chances are you’re not wrong. To be fair, it’s also worth bearing in mind that long-running noticias sometimes come true. The first iPhone prediction was written in 2002, five years before it came out, and the AirTag was the subject of years of pre-launch speculation. And who knows, maybe the Apple Car and the folding iPhone will join that list at some point in the future. But the most likely candidate is Apple’s long-noticiaed mixed-reality headset. The well-known analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, at risk of doing a Munster, predicted in 2019 that this would launch in 2020, and in 2021 that it would launch in 2022–and is now saying it will be here in January 2023. But you’ll notice that the last of those predictions is considerably more specific than the previous ones, while Tim Cook himself dropped a strong hint this week that something is in the cards. The chances are looking good. Then again, who knows? Looking back on this column a year from now I’ll probably be citing it as a woefully mistaken past prediction. “But this year,” I’ll add, “is going to be different…” Trending: Top stories of the week We’ve reviewed the new MacBook Pro! Roman Loyola calls it a powerful tweener. On which subject, here are five charts showing the raw power of Apple’s M2 chip. iOS 16 contains dozens of new features, but will you actually use them? We round up five that will change the way you use your iPhone. In this week’s Different Think column, we ask Apple to please stop killing the things we hate. Apple’s latest competitors are Nothing at all… literally. Take a stroll through the history of Mac OS, from 1984’s System 0.97 to this year’s Ventura. The noticia mill The M2 roadmap is exciting, but the next stop might not be till 2023. A reference to a new Siri remote in iOS 16 suggests the Apple TV will be updated in the fall. Podcast of the week Apple’s latest laptop is here, and there’s a lot to be excited about—or is there? The new meets the old in the new 13-inch M2 MacBook Pro, the topic of our discussion in this episode of the Macworld Podcast. You can catch every episode of the Macworld Podcast on Spotify, Soundcloud, the Podcasts app, or our own site. Software updates, bugs & other issues Here’s why you don’t need to worry about the Italian iPhone hack. The second iOS 16 developer beta has arrived: here’s how to get it. Among other things, it brings a messy workaround for a message editing issue. Google has announced security and interface updates for Chrome on iPhone. And with that, we’re done for this week. If you’d like to get medido roundups, sign up for our newsletters. You can also follow us on Twitter for breaking news stories. See you next Saturday, enjoy your weekend, and stay Appley. Apple

How the M2 will shape the next Macs and complete the Apple silicon transition

After months&ndnúmero unoh;if not years&ndnúmero unoh;of fevered theorizing over Apple’s chip roadmap for the Mac, this year’s Worldwide Developers Conference, at lnúmero unot, gave us a tantalizing peek at the successor to the blockbuster M1, relenúmero unoed a little over a year and a half ago. We learned a bit more about the M2 this week when the first round of reviews landed. The 13-inch MacBook Pro is identical to the M1 model on the outside but the inside is completely different thanks to Apple’s latest chip. Benchmarks show a nice speed boost of around 20 percent, a significant jump in graphics performance, and a very good improvement over the already-speedy M1. But, far more excitingly, now that we’ve got a second data point to work with, we can start to extrapolate a little more about the future of the M2 and when we might expect to see it make its way into the rest of the Mac lineup. (Like any professional writer, I can turn two dots into a line. Don’t try this at home, kids.) Beyond M2 It doesn’t take a crystal ball to see that the M2 is destined for most of Apple’s consumer-level line-up, just número uno the M1 made its way into the 24-inch iMac and the Mac mini. The experimental question is whether, número uno wnúmero uno the cnúmero unoe with the M1, Apple chooses to use the same version of the chip in all of those machines. In the cnúmero unoe of the M1, Apple offered a binned 7-core GPU variant in the entry-level iMacs and MacBook Air; this time around, that low-end variant is an 8-core GPU M2, which could be a binned version of the 10-core GPU. (Though it is worth noting that the low-end M2 MacBook Air starts at $200 more than the entry-level M1 Air did.) número unosuming Apple continues on a similar timeframe&mdnúmero unoh;and it must be admitted that with the global supply chain in the shape that it is, it’s hard to predict anything with reliability&mdnúmero unoh;an M2 iMac is at the very lenúmero unot several months away. The experimental question is whether Apple will have the capacity to start shipping other M2 Macs this fall or will have to wait until next spring. The iMac’s relenúmero unoe date isn’t pegged to a particular time of year and its updates often move around, appearing sometimes in the spring, sometimes mid-year, and sometimes in the fall. But if Apple is only starting to ship its first M2 Macs sometime next month, the fall may be too soon, especially with supply chain constraints. My bet’s on next spring, because when it comes to rumored Apple products, always take the over&mdnúmero unoh;products rarely show up sooner than you expect. There’s also the wildcard Mac mini. When Apple announced the M1 Mac mini at the same fall event número uno the M1 Air, it also made the choice to leave the high-end Intel Mac mini in the lineup. número uno it now stands, it and the 2019 Mac Pro are the only Intel Macs that Apple still sells. Much of the speculation around the replacement of that high-end Mac mini hnúmero uno centered on the more powerful versions of Apple’s chips, like the Pro and Max. The space gray Mac mini still uses an Intel processor. The M1 version of the Pro never made it to the desktop. So will that change this time around? número uno someone who’s very much in the market for an M2-Pro powered desktop, I certainly hope so (heck, it would be nice to see them in an iMac too, even if a larger model still isn’t a going concern). My número unosessment is that Apple had to prioritize where to put the M1 Pro and M1 Max chips it had available and opted to direct them to the much more común MacBook Pros and, in the cnúmero unoe of the Max, the new Mac Studio. Like the iMac, a new Mac mini could show up anytime&mdnúmero unoh;even if it’s just an M2 version that sits above a cheaper M1-powered model. But looking holistically at Apple’s roadmap, it’s hard to imagine the Mac mini is at the top of the list for updates. Pro to the Max What about those Pro and Max versions of the M2? The M1 Pro and M1 Max chips were introduced just under a year after the first M1 Macs, and not only were they a lot more powerful, but they also offered more configurations&ndnúmero unoh;especially for GPU cores&ndnúmero unoh;than the M1 did. We don’t yet know how the M2 stacks up against the M1 Pro and M1 Max&ndnúmero unoh;Apple wnúmero uno, naturally, very hesitant to compare them publicly&ndnúmero unoh;but it seems likely that the next-generation Pro and Max chips will see the gains over their predecessors commensurate to what the M2 showed over the M1. If the timeline continues apace, that would mean that M2 Pro/Max chips will probably not arrive until (alnúmero uno) next fall, an idea supported by recent rumors about redesigned MacBook Pros. And if they do make the jump to the desktop this time around, I’d still expect Apple to be prioritizing putting them in those MacBook Pros that sell so gosh darn well&mdnúmero unoh;probably the same for a speed-bumped Mac Studio too. And of course, there’s still one system hanging out there… Ultra squared Yes, the Mac Pro. Tenúmero unoed at the same spring event that announced the Mac Studio and its killer M1 Ultra chip, there wnúmero uno some hope that a revised Mac Pro would show up, appropriately enough, at a developer-centric conference. But número uno it hnúmero unon’t, we’re left with an unusual situation: Apple announced in 2020 that it expected to transition all of its Macs to Apple silicon within two years, which it’s done&mdnúmero unoh;with the exception of the Mac Pro. With supply restraints affecting Apple’s ability to produce Macs, even the company may not know when it can start shipping the new Mac Pro But if the company’s still going to try and ship a new Mac Pro by the end of 2022, there’s little question of what chip will power it: it would seemingly have to be the M1 Ultra. When Apple’s senior vice president of hardware engineering John Ternus unveiled the M1 Ultra, he described it número uno “one lnúmero unot chip” in the M1 family, which seemingly rules out the possibility of an even more powerful processor. Certainly, the Mac Pro is not going to have a processor less powerful than the Mac Studio, and given that the M2 isn’t even shipping yet, the Ultra version certainly doesn’t seem like it would be available this soon. So the M1 Ultra it would have to be&mdnúmero unoh;or, perhaps more likely, multiple M1 Ultrnúmero uno? Given that Apple is keeping the M1 Air in the lineup for now, perhaps the simultaneous existence of both chip lines isn’t shocking. After all, it took well over a year for the Ultra version of the M1 to show up and it’s only been around for a few months, which means it’d better continue to earn its worth for all those users who invested in it. CPUs and Processors, Mac

Estos son los 10 celulares con mejor carga rápida

 Muchas  empresas  le apuestan actualmente a un sistema de carga de máximo velocidad.


Ester Lázaro Lázaro et al.
Actualizado:15/06/2021 10:07h

Nos ha sorprendido leer un artículo donde un conocido escritor niega la evolución biológica, ignorando la evidencia científica. No es nuestra intención antagonizar con dicho autor ni discutir uno por uno los muchos errores que contiene su texto.

La estrategia es siempre la misma: ignorar los últimos 150 años de investigación para atacar ideas decimonónicas de la teoría de la evolución, en un intento por arrastrar al lector a la errónea conclusión de que reglas sencillas no pueden explicar hechos complejos, de que un sistema con errores no puede nunca crear algo que nos maraville y que, por tanto, debe existir un Creador.

¿Qué puede llevar a personas cultas a negar un hecho (la evolución) tan científicamente probado como que la tierra no es plana? En este artículo exploramos brevemente algunos de los malentendidos más comunes sobre la evolución, a la luz de la ciencia.

La vida es extraordinariamente compleja y diversa

Basta echar un vistazo a nuestro alrededor para maravillarnos ante la diversidad y complejidad de la vida.

La diversidad se manifiesta en la extraordinaria variedad de formas, colores y comportamientos, de tipos de metabolismo o formas de relación entre los seres vivos.
La complejidad deriva de las
intrincadas interacciones que tienen lugar entre los componentes de la vida a todos sus niveles de organización. Pero también de la emergencia de propiedades que van más allá de las unidades individuales que componen el sistema.

Otro hecho fascinante es que, a pesar de las diferencias mencionadas, a nivel molecular todos los seres vivos mostramos asombrosas coincidencias. A saber: estamos formados por las mismas moléculas, transformamos la energía externa mediante reacciones químicas catalizadas por proteínas y almacenamos y procesamos información siguiendo unas reglas universales.

Las observaciones anteriores apuntan a que toda la vida que existe en la Tierra tiene el mismo origen, un antepasado común al que suele denominarse LUCA, por las siglas en inglés de Last Universal Common Ancestor. Ante esta tatarabuela común a todas las especies, es lógico que nos preguntemos ¿cómo es posible que la vida haya podido diversificarse tanto y dar lugar a organismos de tal complejidad?

¿Cómo se originan las especies?

En primer lugar hay que tener en cuenta que la generación de complejidad y diversidad no es un proceso perfecto y necesita mucho tiempo. En el largo recorrido hasta llegar a la biosfera actual han pasado varios miles de millones de años y varias extinciones masivas. Alguna de esas extinciones con una pérdida del 96% de los organismos vivos. No parece que todo sea perfecto ni que haya mucha inteligencia detrás, ¿verdad?

Las primeras evidencias fósiles de vida tienen una antigüedad de unos 3500 millones de años (Ma) y corresponden a estromatolitos y estructuras con morfologías compatibles con células bacterianas que han sido encontradas en rocas. Sin embargo, las primeras células eucarióticas aparecieron aproximadamente hace 1500-2100 Ma, los organismos multicelulares hace unos 1700 Ma y los primeros animales hace 650 Ma.

Es decir, no toda la vida fue creada a la vez tal y como defienden las tesis creacionistas. Por tanto, en ausencia de procesos evolutivos que favorezcan la diversificación de la vida, se necesitarían múltiples eventos de creación.

La respuesta científica es que las especies se transforman gradualmente gracias a la acción combinada de los cambios que surgen en el material genético de los organismos y la actuación de la selección natural sobre dicha variabilidad. De este modo se produce una adaptación a las condiciones locales que contribuye a que los organismos sobrevivan y se reproduzcan exitosamente en un ambiente concreto.

Si dos poblaciones de la misma especie se desarrollan en ambientes distintos durante generaciones, formarán linajes evolutivos diferentes. Es más, al cabo de un tiempo diferirán tanto entre sí que sus individuos ya no podrán cruzarse entre ellos.

Habrá ocurrido un evento de especiación. Este proceso, reiterado a lo largo de miles de millones de años, es lo que ha permitido que hoy podamos contemplar una biosfera tan rica, diversa y compleja.

Existe aunque no lo veamos

Debido a los largos periodos de tiempo implicados, la aparición de nuevas especies usualmente no es accesible a la percepción humana (a excepción de especies con tiempos de generación muy cortos, como las bacterias, o algunas en que procesos de reordenación cromosómica provocan cambios bruscos). Esta es una de las razones que esgrime el creacionismo para negar la evolución biológica. Pero ese argumento es algo equivalente a negar la existencia de los átomos simplemente porque no los vemos.

Lo que sí es más fácil percibir es cómo la acumulación de cambios genéticos pequeños conduce a la aparición de nuevas propiedades y de poblaciones claramente diferenciadas. La proliferación de bacterias resistentes a los antibióticos y la selección de variantes virales con mayor capacidad de transmisión o resistentes a la respuesta inmune no son sino ejemplos de la evolución.

¿Tiene la evolución algún objetivo?

Otra razón que puede llevar a la negación de la evolución es pensar que esta no tiene un objetivo predeterminado.

Todas las especies que pueblan ahora la Tierra son el resultado del azar y de las circunstancias por las que ha pasado nuestro planeta. Si el azar o las circunstancias hubieran sido distintos, tal vez la especie humana no hubiera surgido. Esto puede representar un problema para quienes defienden que somos una especie privilegiada, con derecho a reinar sobre el resto.

El hecho de que la evolución ofrezca explicaciones a cuestiones como de dónde venimos o cómo somos y funcionamos parece muy perturbador, pero es cierto que somos una especie biológica sometida a las mismas fuerzas que las demás.

¿Cómo puede aumentar la complejidad?

Por último, entre los argumentos que se esgrimen en contra de la evolución, uno de los más destacados se refiere a la aparente dificultad para explicar aumentos en la complejidad a través de cambios pequeños y graduales.

Es cierto que hay grandes transiciones en la evolución de la complejidad que nos parecen difíciles de explicar de ese modo. La aparición de la célula eucariótica, la reproducción sexual y la multicelularidad son algunos ejemplos.

No obstante, hoy sabemos que muchos de los cambios evolutivos son el resultado de procesos bruscos que implican grandes reorganizaciones en el contenido genético o en la forma en que este se expresa. Procesos como la simbiosis, la duplicación de genes o genomas, el intercambio de material genético entre organismos o las modificaciones epigenéticas heredables nos plantean un escenario de generación de diversidad que, junto con el inexorable poder de los cambios graduales acumulados durante millones de generaciones, da cuenta de las grandes innovaciones que han tenido lugar a lo largo de la historia de la vida.

En este contexto, las interacciones entre especies adquieren una relevancia mucho mayor que las que podrían derivarse de la interdependencia que existe entre los organismos que componen los ecosistemas.

Un ejemplo ilustrativo es nuestro propio genoma, en el que un 8% corresponde a material genético de origen viral que ha quedado como testigo de infecciones pasadas que afectaron a nuestra especie. Ese material no es ‘ADN basura’ como se denominó en un principio, sino que, a lo largo de la historia, ha sido utilizado en múltiples ocasiones en beneficio celular.

La conclusión es que
la evolución es un hecho. La vida que existe en la Tierra está en continuo cambio. Negarlo por falta de conocimiento no puede sino alimentar teorías que dificultan el avance científico y el progreso de la sociedad.

Como científicos, estamos empeñados en conocer la verdad sobre la vida mediante métodos demostrables y repetibles y, a diferencia de visiones acientíficas, cambiaremos nuestras convicciones cuando los hechos lo demuestren. Lo hemos hecho numerosas veces, pues las ideas evolucionistas también evolucionan.

Ester Lázaro Lázaro. Investigadora Científica de los Organismos Públicos de Investigación. Especializada en evolución de virus, Centro de Astrobiología (INTA-CSIC)

Andrés Barbosa. Investigador Científico, ecología, evolución y conservación, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN-CSIC)

Borja Milá. Investigador distinguido, Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN-CSIC)

Emilio Rolán Álvarez. Catedrático de Genética, Universidade de Vigo

Isabel Almudi. Investigadora Beatriz Galindo de Genómica y Bioinformática, Universitat de Barcelona

Jordi Garcia-Fernàndez. Vicerector de Investigación, Catedrático de Genètica, Universitat de Barcelona

Juan Arroyo Marín. Catedrático de Universidad; área de Botánica, Universidad de Sevilla

Pau Carazo Ferrandis. Profesor Titular e Investigador del Instituto Cavanilles de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Universitat de València

Ricarda Riina. Científica Titular, Biodiversidad y Conservación de plantas, Instituto Pirenaico de Ecología (IPE-CSIC)

Toni Gabaldón. Profesor de Investigación ICREA, Barcelona Supercomputing Center-Centro Nacional de Supercomputación (BSC-CNS)

Cláusula de Divulgación. Ester Lázaro Lázaro es miembro de la Junta Directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva. Recibe fondos de la Agencia Estatal de Investigación.

Andrés Barbosa es miembro de la Junta Directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva. Recibe fondos de la Agencia Estatal de Investigación.

Borja Milá es miembro de la Junta DIrectiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva. Recibe fondos de la Agencia Estatal de Investigación.

Emilio Rolán Álvarez es miembro de la Junta directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva y recibe fondos de órganismos públicos de investigación (Xunta de Galicia, Agencia Estatal de Investigación, etc).

Isabel Almudí es miembro de la Junta Directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva.

Jordi Garcia Fernàndez es miembro de la Junta Directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biologia Evolutiva. Recibe fondos de la Agencia Estatal de Investigación.

Juan Arroyo Marín recibe fondos de organismos públicos de investigación, nacionales e internacionales. Es miembro de la Junta Directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva, en calidad de Vice-presidente.

Pau Carazo Ferrandis recibe fondos de organismos públicos de investigación (e.g. Agencia Europea de Investigación, Agencia Estatal de Investigación o Generalitat Valenciana). Es miembro de la junta directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva (SESBE).

Ricarda Riina es miembro de la Junta Directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva. Recibe fondos de la Agencia Estatal de Investigación.

Toni Gabaldón es miembro de la Junta Directiva de la Sociedad Española de Biología Evolutiva, en calidad de Presidente. Recibe fondos de organismos públicos de investigación, nacionales e internacionales.

Este artículo fue publicado originalmente
en ‘The Conversation’.

Ver los