Comments for Ten Things To Update Darwin »
Posted By Mikunited 6 months, 2 weeks ago in Science & TechnologyWhen Matt Ridley read Nick Lane’s new book he said “If Charles Darwin sprang from his grave, I would give him this fine book to bring him up to speed.” We asked Nick to write a quick 10-point primer for the father of evolution about our current understanding of the science of life.
Read Full Story at timesonline.typepad.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 13
-
0%
airglide6 months, 2 weeks ago
-
50%
Mikunited6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why read something about Darwin,when you have no interest! It's like me reading about intelligent design.Evolution isn't pro,or anti G_d,in fact Darwin was a highly religious Christian.One can believe in G_d and evolution.Surly if G-d is omnipotent,He chooses how thing come about.One thing I can tell you friend,is that the Earth isn't 4400 years old and we come from common ancestry to other primates..You can believe this and your religion.
Reply-
0%
airglide6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is a good idea to study what others think. The article says that sex is totally useless. I would say that it is a deterrent to mutation. Any variation in one is compensated for when breeding with another. One more reason evolution doesn't work.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
airglide6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
from the article
Reply
We now know how eyes evolved in more detail than any other organ. Surprisingly, it looks as if the critical light-sensitive protein at the centre of it all, rhodopsin, evolved from an ancestor in algae where it is used to calibrate light levels in photosynthesis.-
-
0%
airglide6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So instead of interpreting the evidence correctly or recognizing that you don't know everything, you close your mind to any alternatives to your theories? Technology today would seem like magic to those a thousand years ago. We are still there with what we think we know. To think that a complex integrated series of random events resulted in what we see today is a belief in magic!!
Reply-
100%
smithichie6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My mind is not closed to alternatives, I just require there be evidence supporting those alternatives.
Reply
What we see today is the result of some 4 billion years of evolution. Yes random events do indeed play a role, sometimes a major one, as in the dino extinction, however it should be noted that Natural Selection is NOT a random process. The key word being Selection.
The evidence for such is overwhelming and covering many fields of science. Take genetics, an entire field of science that didn't exist in Darwin's day. Genetics not only supports evolution, it has given us a much deeper insight to it and it's science is so strong that it is trusted in the Courts over than eyewitness testimony. People are released from Death Row and placed there over genetic evidence.-
0%
airglide6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When you study DNA you find that any change is a failure. A point of interest. Doctors are recommending to people not to consume bio engineered foods due to health problems. In India there was a story that engineered cotton seed was destroying the ground it was grown in. So...something that came about accidentally is better than something we deliberately tinker with?
Reply-
100%
smithichie6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Indirectly we have been genetically engineering plants and animals for thousands of years already.
Reply
How many doctors recomend against taking insulin? who knows how many lives have been saved since it was genetically engineered to be produced by bacteria using a human gene, instead of the pancreas' of more cuddly animals? This not only saves cuddly animals but it's also rejected less to not at all since it's insulin naturally produced by our species.
As for that change to DNA happening in nature, resulting in a benefit? How about this critter? Flavobacterium, the nylon digesting bug.
What is so interesting about a critter capable of digesting nylon you ask? Well, nylon is a synthetic product that wasn't available for nature to learn how to eat until the late 1930s. This critter's genes gained new information that was of no use until this time and in a relatively short time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nylon-eating_bacteria
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
rally-monkeyComment removed: Abusive
-
Neutral
dailyblueberry6 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The "evidence" argument is funny to me. Just because a group defines something as evidence doesn't make it true....it just makes it true to them. The only reason the color "blue" is called the color blue, is because we as a group have accepted the distinction and carried it forward to the next generation.
Reply
"Evidence" is given for both groups to make each feel better, but in reality it is all based on what we believe and what the others around us believe.
To say that I know I came from the muck is a belief, just as saying I know I was created by my maker is a belief.
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.