Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Another Truism Dies

A new paper can be found at Phys.Org undermining the idea that what drives evolution is the “decoupling” of DNA with phylogenic structures. This idea is implicit in the twin ideas of pseudogenes and gene duplication: both allow the DNA to become “uncoupled” from the structures they code for and so RM becomes permissible. Well, this paper shuts down this idea. Given the success of cichlids, understanding the evolution of these two jaws has become an important line of inquiry for biologists. “We’re trying to gain a better understanding of the origins and maintenance of biodiversity,” says Albertson. Researchers have long thought that the two sets of jaws are evolutionarily decoupled and can evolve independently of one another, pushing the Read More ›

Stanford: Plants evolved complexity in two rapid bursts — 250 million years apart

Researcher: "The most surprising thing is this kind of stasis, this plateau in complexity after the initial evolution of seeds and then the total change that happened when flowering plants started diversifying," said lead study author Andrew Leslie, an assistant professor of geological sciences at Stanford's School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences (Stanford Earth). "The reproductive structures look different in all these plants, but they all have about the same number of parts during that stasis." Read More ›

Evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne says they’ll never clone a herd of mammoths

Coyne: What they’d get would be a genetic chimera, an almost entirely Asian elephant but one that is hairier, chunkier, and more tolerant of cold. That is NOT a woolly mammoth, nor would it behave like a woolly mammoth, for they’re not inserting behavior genes. Read More ›

When people claim that “the science” says this or that…

Discussing the recent essay by medical statistician John Ioannidis on the was politicization and shoddy research around COVID-19 are corrupting science, philosopher Edward Feser focuses on a couple of his points, including this one, “the deleterious role that social media have played.” Read More ›

World’s oldest art raises question: Is it art?

Researchers would not be asking if it is art if it were not so old (between 169,000 and 226,000). The underlying assumption seems to be that humans did not think imaginatively in those days. The evidence seems to contradict the evolutionary assumption. Read More ›

Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first science journalist?

What Huxley was marketing was not a correct analysis of the cause of the plague but one that promoted materialism. Today, for example, we constantly hear similar stuff like - just for example - “science is closing in on the human mind” or “apes think like people.” They can’t help it, of course, but Huxley’s career might help us understand better how it got started. Read More ›

No Middle Ground

Neitzsche’s conclusions are sound, some would argue inexorable, if one grants his fundamental premise, that God is dead. The “good” beyond good and evil is the strong man, the superior man (ubermensch), imposing his will on the weak. In a world without God, there is only power, and those who have it and those who do not. A strong man brutally subjugates a weak man or even a weak people. That is good because it is the natural course of the world once the strong man throws off the fetters of Christianity’s unnatural “slave morality.” You can have God and the transcendent moral principles that flow from His Being. Or you can have the ubermensch. There is no middle ground. Read More ›

A new open access paper offers an approach to cancer that sees past Darwin

Researchers: Although neo-Darwinian (and less often Lamarckian) dynamics are regularly invoked to interpret cancer’s multifarious molecular profiles, they shine little light on how tumorigenesis unfolds and often fail to fully capture the frequency and breadth of resistance mechanisms. Read More ›