Paul Nelson: Testing for Common Descent (Signal + Noise?)

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@pnelson

Josh Swamidass has tried his hand at these exercises. I’ll send them to anyone who is interested (contact me at nelsonpa@alumni.uchicago.edu).

And I got every one of them correct! It is quite easy. They all have the same answer. I won’t spoil the test by saying it yet though.

@pnelson

Me: (sigh – thinking, what the hell is an explanatory framework?)

Really @pnelson? That is a foundational concept in philosophy of science…

@pnelson

Student: UCD is not a predictive theory, at least not in the way you want. It’s an explanatory framework. And UCD doesn’t need confirmation any more, because everything we know in biology supports it.

Can you tell us more about this summer camp? This student does not seem like an ID supporter. Do you include non-ID students?

@T_aquaticus

For the purposes of this thread, universal common descent isn’t even the question. The real question is if divergent species, like a human and a trout, share a common ancestor. Casting doubt on UCD does not cast doubt on CD.

I agree. As I’ve said before, UCD is a red herring.

@T_aquaticus

UCD is the red herring.

I’m glad someone is making this point in my absence. Thanks @T_aquaticus.