https://www.scientific...
> The big problem lies in the metaphor implied by the memes. Some carcinization memes explicitly state that evolution has a goal of turning other species into crabs. That’s wrong. When we use words that imply some organisms are “ultimate forms,” it implies they are genetically better than others. Not so, because there are millions of species already well adapted to their own environments that haven’t turned into crabs. The world is always changing, so some species will inevitably go extinct. But extinction isn’t a value judgement. If we assume that Darwinian evolution is directed by goals, then we are applying our own biases where they don’t belong. It’s a slippery slope from “Nature loves a crab” to “If crabs are better than others, then some people might be too.” Unfortunately, that’s also the basis of eugenics, which used natural selection as a false justification for mass sterilization of people considered “undesirable” in the last century. To be clear, there is no evidence from the prevalence of convergent evolution to support discrimination or eugenics.

i didn't think this whole time that this needed spelling out, but i've "normies know only 3 kinds of feldspar"'d other things in analogous contexts