Evolutionary Science, not Darwinism

[T_aquaticus]

@Mark

It seems that an MS person might be fine with leaving the PBS explanation as is since it’s for a non-scientific audience. However, an EES person might insist that niche construction and developmental bias MUST be mentioned to explain this convergence because although an MS person would acknowledge these mechanisms, she he might not see them as crucial. An EES might see them as MORE crucial than selection.

Niche construction is already well within the mainstream theory.

@Mark

It seems that @sygarte is absolutely right. The difference between the MS and EES is one of emphasis. @Eddie @swamidass @Mung @jongarvey what are your thoughts?

EES seems to be more about flash than substance. The mechanisms they talk about are already in the mainstream theory, but they try to give them new names and pretend as if they have discovered something new. Even with niche construction and epigenetics it still boils down to the DNA sequence of the genome and how random mutation, neutral drift, and selection shape it. Carl Zimmer wrote a great article on the last big EES meeting, and this is what he reported from one of the interactions between scientists:

“This strategy is to produce rapid evolutionary genome change in response to the unfavorable environment,” Noble declared to the audience. “It’s a self-maintaining system that enables a particular characteristic to occur independent of the DNA.”

That didn’t sound right to Shuker, and he was determined to challenge Noble after the applause died down.

“Could you comment at all on the mechanism underlying that discovery?” Shuker asked.

Noble stammered in reply. “The mechanism in general terms, I can, yes…” he said, and then started talking about networks and regulation and a desperate search for a solution to a crisis. “You’d have to go back to the original paper,” he then said.

While Noble was struggling to respond, Shuker went back to the paper on an iPad. And now he read the abstract in a booming voice.

“‘Our results demonstrate that natural selection can rapidly rewire regulatory networks,’” Shuker said. He put down the iPad. “So it’s a perfect, beautiful example of rapid neo-Darwinian evolution,” he declared.
Scientists Seek to Update Evolution

[T_aquaticus]

@John_Harshman

@swamidass and @T_aquaticus : did you say that?

No. That’s just silly. It seems that the only thing the ID crowd has left is the persecution card.

[gbrooks9 (GeorgeB)]

@John_Harshman

@John_Harshman speaking to @Eddie:
“You seem exceeding hysterical and long-winded here. Do you believe any of that, or are you just viewing with alarm?”

@John_Harshman

Ive tried to nudge @eddie into fewer paragraphs… he resists the paradigm!

[Mung]

@gbrooks9

Ive tried to nudge @eddie into fewer paragraphs

I love his posts. They appear reasoned and informed.

[Patrick]

@Mung

I love his posts. They appear reasoned and informed.

Yes, they are. And they are well written and grammatically correct. But as a sign of my old age, I find myself nodding off before I get to the end. When I awake, I have to go to the beginning and reread. Perhaps we can set up a twitter account for @Eddie. I am sure he could come up with equally eloquent answers in 140 characters. It would be a fun exercise for @eddie to have a twitter conversation like the President of the United States does with the American people.

[Mung]

@Patrick

But as a sign of my old age, I find myself nodding off before I get to the end.

I prefer to keep my posts short. Some people don’t like that! If you think @Eddie 's posts are too long I have some others you could read in order to compare.