another paper on darwinism: https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2009-12.html
It's a schormisborg of derp research and case studies. It's got a shocking number of human experiments. On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 7:35 PM Gillian Densmore <[email protected]> wrote: > several are available: > https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2018-03.html > https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2020-02.html > https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1993-10.html > https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1994-12.html > > how many more do you need? > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 7:26 PM Gillian Densmore <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2020-01.html >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 6:33 PM Prof David West <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Nick, the study I have seen did not involve human intervention with moth >>> eggs. Because the industrial revolution in England was contaminating the >>> moth environment with soot, including the tree bark upon which the moths >>> rested, they adapted color to soot-black. Years later, when minimal >>> environment concerns cleaned up factory emissions, the moths reverted to >>> original coloring. >>> >>> davew >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021, at 3:53 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> > Glen, >>> > >>> > When I was a lad of 40, there was some evidence kicking around that >>> > melanism was a developmental adaptation to forest fire destruction. >>> > Somebody treated moth eggs with chemicals from burnt wood and for the >>> > next few generations, the resulting moths were black, only to switch >>> > back to white if stimulation of the eggs was continued. How that >>> > literature panned out, I don't know. >>> > >>> > N >>> > >>> > Nick Thompson >>> > [email protected] >>> > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ >>> > >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$ >>> > Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 10:44 AM >>> > To: [email protected] >>> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Popper on Darwinism >>> > >>> > The creationists have been peddling this rhetoric for a very long >>> time. >>> > It's important to read Popper's recant and clarification. From >>> Popper's >>> > 1978 paper "Natural Selection and the Emergence of Mind": >>> > >>> > "However, Darwin's own most important contribution to the theory of >>> > evolution, his theory of natural selection, is difficult to test. >>> There >>> > are some tests, even some experimental tests; and in some cases, such >>> > as the famous phenomenon known as "industrial melanism", we can >>> observe >>> > natural selec- tion happening under our very eyes, as it were. >>> > Nevertheless, really severe tests of the theory of natural selection >>> > are hard to come by, much more so than tests of otherwise comparable >>> > theories in physics or chemistry. The fact that the theory of natural >>> > selection is difficult to test has led some people, anti-Darwinists >>> and >>> > even some great Darwinists, to claim that it is a tautology. A >>> > tautology like "All tables are tables" is not, of course, test- able; >>> > nor has it any explanatory power. It is therefore most surprising to >>> > hear that some of the greatest contemporary Darwinists themselves >>> > formulate the theory in such a way that it amounts to the tautology >>> > that those organisms that leave most offspring leave most offspring. >>> > And C. H. Waddington even says somewhere (and he defends this view in >>> > other places) that "Natural selection . . . turns out ... to be a >>> > tautology". 6 However, he attributes at the same place to the theory >>> an >>> > "enormous power ... of explanation". Since the explanatory power of a >>> > tautology is obviously zero, something must be wrong here. >>> > >>> > Yet similar passages can be found in the works of such great >>> Darwinists >>> > as Ronald Fisher, J. B. S. Haldane, and George Gaylord Simpson; and >>> > others. >>> > >>> > I mention this problem because I too belong among the culprits. Influ- >>> > enced by what these authorities say, I have in the past described the >>> > theory as "almost tautological", 7 and I have tried to explain how the >>> > theory of natural selection could be untestable (as is a tautology) >>> and >>> > yet of great scientific interest. My solution was that the doctrine of >>> > natural selection is a most suc- cessful metaphysical research >>> > programme. It raises detailed problems in many fields, and it tells us >>> > what we would expect of an acceptable solution of these problems. >>> > >>> > I still believe that natural selection works in this way as a research >>> > pro- gramme. Nevertheless, I have changed my mind about the >>> testability >>> > and the logical status of the theory of natural selection; and I am >>> > glad to have an opportunity to make a recantation. My recantation may, >>> > I hope, contribute a little to the understanding of the status of >>> > natural selection. What is important is to realize the explanatory >>> task >>> > of natural selection; and especially to realize what can be explained >>> > without the theory of natural selection." >>> > >>> > >>> > On 12/13/21 8:32 AM, David Eric Smith wrote: >>> >> Dave, to clarify: >>> >> >>> >> What does Popper (or what do you) take to be the referent for the tag >>> “Darwinism”. The term has gone through so many hands with so many >>> purposes, that I am hesitant to engage with only the term, without a fuller >>> sense of what it stands for in the worldview of my interlocutor. >>> >> >>> >> Thanks, >>> >> >>> >> Eric >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> On Dec 13, 2021, at 10:33 AM, Prof David West <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> “/Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical >>> >>> research program—a possible framework for testable scientific >>> theories./” >>> >>> Karl Popper. >>> >>> >>> >>> I like this distinction but immediately wonder if it might provide >>> some analytical / research means that could be applied to other >>> "metaphysical research programs" — creationism for example, or the plethora >>> of efforts, by scientists, to reconcile their faith with their science. Or, >>> Newton's [and Jung's] (in)famous commitment to Egyptian Alchemy. >>> >>> >>> >>> Would it be possible to use the Tao de Ching or the Diamond Sutra or >>> Whitehead's Process Philosophy (not a random selection, I group the three >>> intentionally) as a metaphysical research program and derive some >>> interesting and useful science? >>> >>> >>> >>> davew >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie." >>> > ☤>$ uǝlƃ >>> > >>> > .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- >>> > - . >>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe >>> > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> > archives: >>> > 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- >>> - . >>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> > archives: >>> > 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - >>> . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: >>> 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
