For a counterexample to this tired argument for irreducible complexity, check
out :
Bridgham, Carroll, and Thornton. 2006. Evolution of hormone-receptor
complexity by molecular exploitation. Science 312:97-101.
Turns out all the parts don't have to be there simultaneously afterall.
Cheers,
Dear colleagues,
The LearningForSustainability website - http://learningforsustainability.net
- has been substantially revised and updated over the past few months. This
site focusses on sustainability issues such as natural resource management,
and provides an on-line guide for government
Carissa:
you've got quite a collection of concerns about evolution here, and
you're asking a lot of readers to go thru them all and teach you a basic
course in evolution. too bad you didn't have one already, then it would
be possible to start this discussion at some point later than where it
was
Below is a job announcement at The Champaign County Forest Preserve
District in east central Illinois. Please only reply back to the address
given in the announcement. Not this email address. Thank you.
Champaign County Forest Preserve District
POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT
Director of Business,
The answer is much simpler. The Theory of Evolution explains those data.
No other theory does. Someone wants to propose another theory to explain
those data, I'd be all ears, but my ears are closed the theories that
are nothing more than criticisms of other theories.
Rob Hamilton
So easy it
Dear Kelly:
Don´t know about the revutal to R. Carson's allegations, but there are
tons of info (I am in the middle of México, a bit far from a library, and so I
am at a disadvantage to give you relevant references ) on estrogen-like
compounds that result from the breakdown of DDT,
A 2-year postdoctoral research associate position is available starting this
fall/winter to study the
nutritional ecology and foraging behavior of red imported fire ants.
We are specifically interested in exploring macronutrient selection at the
colony level and the extent
to which
I do not think evolution is supremely important because it is my specialty.
On the contrary, it is my specialty because I think it is supremely important.
- /George Gaylord Simpson/
JJ Le Roux
~~~
Department for Tropical Plant and Soil Sciences
Two further problems with this thread.
First -- and this may be my weakest argument -- I think Shipman
overestimates the chances for the four domains of TPA to come together.
Without being sure of the formula she used to get to 30,000^4, but I suspect
there is a fatal flaw in the assumptions.
Evolutionary Analysis by Freeman and Herron is a good
introductory textbook that will explain many of your
questions about the validity of the theory of
evolution. It is easy to read and interesting and
should provide a basis for further exploring any other
questions you have.
Christie
Forest
Carissa,
There are journals and books specifically on molecular evolution
including molecular phylogenetics. You might want to examine the works
of Kimura, Nei, Gillespie, Ohta, Felsenstein, Li, and many others. They
might even help you in your systematics project.
Molecular evidence is
On a very fundamental level, we agree with evolution because the theory
was borne out of the scientific process, a process that has made
possible all of the scientific knowledge we have today. Humans have
constructed and embraced the scientific process as a rigorous, critical,
objective manner
Hello Carissa,
Interesting post. I'm curious - why are creationists so convinced of
intelligent design? There are very few publications concerning
intelligent design at the molecular or biochemical level. Most ID
folks (if not all) seem baffled at how such incredibly complex
mechanisms
I'm curious -- are there any lines of Christian philosophical thought which
address the (in my eyes) issue that those Christians who argue evolution
using (pseudo)scientific approaches are basically stating to the world I
have no real faith in my God, and I need proof that He exists? If one
truly
Carissa,
Very interesting statement. I suggest that you write your own NSF grant and
use the money to study the apparent discrepancies in our understanding of blood
clotting, molecular evolution, and design. If your hypotheses hold true, you
will overturn centuries of misunderstanding and
A comment on this question.
I would draw to our attention that the question Why do scientists
believe...? is phrased in the same context as Why do people believe...in =
a
god. However, this wording falsely put those two questions into the same
apparent conceptual framework. However, I would say
Colorado State University -- Fort Collins, Colorado
POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT - QUANTITATIVE POPULATION
ECOLOGIST
POSITION #010626.0002 FWCB [8 Oct. 2007]: Assistant/Associate Professor in
Quantitative Population Ecology
LOCATION: Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology,
A student once asked a science teacher, What is most important, knowledge
or belief? The professor answered, Knowledge, of course. The student
then asked a church pastor the same question, and the pastor replied,
Belief, of course. The student then went to a wise philosopher with this
18 matches
Mail list logo
