Fish, Evolution, and Moving Goalposts

Yeah of course you’d have to realize that gene sequences and living organisms are dis-analogous to automobiles and their parts in so many fundamentally important ways, and mutations aren’t really like the trajectories of molecules in the wind except in the sense already articulated that predicting exact details of where they will happen can’t be done with much accuracy.

Why is it “stretching things”?

Do tell.

http://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com/about-the-ees/how-the-ees-differs-from-the-modern-synthesis/
http://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com/people/

Came across this a few days back… not yet gone through everything.
The differences they cite between EES and MS are interesting.

Are you sure those meetings and courses are EES?

@John_Harshman:
Not sure about the courses. However, the cite calls itself EES and has a page describing how it’s different from MS.

But that was supposed to be the answer to my question. We all know they have a web site. What about the meetings you claimed?

I found two workshop reports… am attaching the first one

There also seems to be a conference planned April at Cambridge -

And what seems to be a research programme with a funding of 12 million dollars
http://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com/the-project/research-projects/

and several publications-

http://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com/the-project/publications-from-the-project/

Edit : @Mercer: you might find the site interesting. They give their hypothesis for EES (along with how it’s different from MS) and also pursue a research programme to test some of these hypothesis.

At least you can now tell people that it not all talk…

a step by step explanation (at the genetic level) to how such systems evolved.

People in Hell want ice water too. :slightly_smiling_face: Why should anyone listen to ID-Creationist demands when you guys can’t provide a single solitary detail about your “Design” claims?

1 Like

That is literally what has been provided, but it is being dismissed out of hand as a “just-so story”. So clearly a step by step explanation at the genetic level isn’t what you want.

2 Likes

Where do you find the 12 million dollars?

I’m not impressed with my initial sample of one of the papers. It still looks like handwaving to me…

[quote=“John_Harshman, post:52, topic:5397”]
12 million dollars?
[/quote,]

There is a section called funding under the major section projects

Why am I not surprised you feel that way…

No coping out. Evolutionism claims to be based on scientific evidence from the natural world.
Its up to them to show us this evidence. Not askl what YEC/ID want to see.
just admit there is no evidence. Indeed evidence of invisable things from the past is hard to show.
Its not like physics or medicine.
Too bad!
Evolutionism is based on mutationism for its mechanism.
It can’t just be a line of reasoning, as Darwin demanded, from watching black bears miss the seals while white ones get them in the arctic.

Ah, Templeton. I should have known. In fact I strongly suspected.

2 Likes

Me too… interesting isn’t it.

where? are you saying that we have a step by step explanation (at the genetic level) for how the flagellum for instance evolved?

Yeah Nick Matzke provided one in 2003. But in this thread a step-by-step explanation for the evolution of a protein coding gene de novo from non-coding DNA is linked in the OP.