This experiment seems to prove the exact opposite to what they are saying.
Obviously many/most? animals have evolved group behaviours that benefit their species over other species which in turn benefits themselves.
Often these behaviours are not directly related to propagating their own genes ie protecting someone else's kid or having enough poison in you to scare something that kills you into not eating others like you.
How are these spiders different?
The 'group' that was suited to the environment failed.
This to me proves that groups don't evolve. If it was the group that evolved and not the individual then the group suited to the environment would have survived.
Instead it reverted back to combined individual behaviour.
The individuals had evolved to their environment and had genetic behaviour that allowed them in their natural environment to work as a team for the success of all members as per usual. Put them into another environment and they fail because their personal evolution was not perfected for that environment.
A group doesn't "evolve" overnight. That would be environmental pressures influencing it, not evolutionary. That the groups reverted showed heritability in the face of individual needs. If it were strictly individual needs, the colonies shouldn't have reverted; the evolutionary forces that directed warrior/nanny ratio should have reflected the environment instead of the ancestry of the group.
Agreed! Whatever behavior is ultimately observed, it must be acting in a manner that is beneficial to the individual. The only reason such behavior exists is because the gains to the individual outweigh the costs.
Obviously many/most? animals have evolved group behaviours that benefit their species over other species which in turn benefits themselves.
Often these behaviours are not directly related to propagating their own genes ie protecting someone else's kid or having enough poison in you to scare something that kills you into not eating others like you.
How are these spiders different?
The 'group' that was suited to the environment failed.
This to me proves that groups don't evolve. If it was the group that evolved and not the individual then the group suited to the environment would have survived.
Instead it reverted back to combined individual behaviour.
The individuals had evolved to their environment and had genetic behaviour that allowed them in their natural environment to work as a team for the success of all members as per usual. Put them into another environment and they fail because their personal evolution was not perfected for that environment.