The Guinness Book of World Records is renowned for its collection of odd feats and extraordinary measurements. One of its entries may someday be a young miniature stallion named Einstein, which promises to rewrite the record as the smallest horse ever.

Vampire bats, boas, pythons, and pit vipers―like rattlesnakes, copperheads, and cottonmouths―all have specialized infrared-sensing organs that allow them to determine if something might be prey. Of these creatures, the pit vipers’ “pit,” which is located between its eyes and nostrils, is by far the most sensitive.

Two species of passion-vine butterflies share the same wing patterns and coloring, which some scientists believe provide “some of the most striking examples of adaptation by natural selection.”¹ But specifically how these patterns emerged through natural selection has not been worked out in detail.

A new Smithsonian exhibit will feature fleshed-out faces “of our earliest human ancestors.”¹ Fossil evidence was combined with evolutionary beliefs to depict how these seven creatures may have looked. The artistic results are stunning, but are they actually historical reconstructions—or evolutionary propaganda?

Scientific knowledge has experienced tremendous advances in the last several decades, especially in such relatively new fields as molecular biology, genomics, and embryonic development. Some biologists say, however, that much of what has been learned is not adequately explained by the standard evolutionary model. So, they are looking at alternate ways that evolution could be at work.