> natural selection is the only causal mechanism (outside of pure chance) It is this particular cult-like insistence on the omnipotence of natural selection th

> natural selection is the only causal mechanism (outside of pure chance) It is this particular cult-like insistence on the omnipotence of natural selection that I challenge. Maybe there are other causal mechanisms? In any case, it needs to be a falsifiable hypothesis before we can call it "science". Can you prove natural selection caused this particular feature of suicidal honeybees? Even if we assume the author's natural selection explanation makes sense, the causal mechanism is FAR from clear. My complaint is, biologists are wrong by limiting themselves ONLY to the evolutionary toolbox instead of seeking other causal mechanisms. And it looks like a conspiracy theory when the come up with fanciful unfalsifiable unprovable "evolutionary" explanations of everything. > Because under a naive understanding of evolution, it is a paradox. Then maybe the response should be, something is wrong with the theory of evolution, i.e. the theory of evolution cannot explain every feature of every living being, and we need not pretend it can.