Evolution

Epigenetics (changes in the course of life that alter the state in which genes are inherited) seems to offer explicitly science-based explanations for observations, rather than the decades-long usual: We can fit even this into Darwinism! For example,  “Evolutionary psychology: The grandmother thesis, yet again” And also, of course, this: “‘Grandmother’ thesis in human evolution takes a hit.” (Shrug.) That’s what’s killing Darwinism. For everything to fit in, the theory must be everything and thus nothing. For example, Evolutionary psychology does not, for the most part, explain puzzling human behavior. It offers Darwinian explanations for conventional behavior that are intended to supplant traditional ones. For example, why we are sexually jealous (not fear of abandonment, but “sperm competition”); why we don’t stick to our goals Read More ›

It would have looked great as a three-dollar bill. A number of high-profile Darwinians ended up passing it around. David Klinghoffer updates the story at Evolution News & Views: I called out the Darwin activists who were promoting this “news,” including Michael Zimmerman of the Clergy Letter Project. Well, they’re back and defending themselves and each other. P.Z. Myers now agrees with me that “Joe Hannon” is a fake name — used, he informs us, by an often-banned Internet troll from Manchester, England, who haunts blog comments sections under a variety of pseudonyms. Myers cites University of Toronto’s Larry Moran, saying that “Hannon” is “a holocaust denier. He used to run a business ‘selling components — just nuts and bolts Read More ›

From ScienceDaily: Rapid evolution of other species happens all around us all the time — and many of the most extreme examples are associated with human influences. Consider three examples: Commercial fishing. When fishing pressure is high, the fish evolve to reproduce when they are younger and smaller, and thus tend to have fewer, smaller offspring. This evolutionary change can, in turn, reduce fisheries yields and the sustainability. But is this really a form of evolution? That is, are the changes irreversible? Will speciation occur in the affected population, so that the two new groups cannot interbreed with each other? Or, if the bottom fell out of the fish market, would everything be pretty much the same a couple of Read More ›

Could have done without him, maybe. Part of a long form article on the “great man” theory in science, by Philip Ball at Nautilus: So I asked historian and philosopher of science James Lennox of the University of Pittsburgh, an expert on the history of Darwinian theory, who might have done the job in place of Darwin and Wallace. His answer was striking: The story might not have gone that way at all. “When you read through Darwin’s Species Notebooks and see the struggle he went through, and then you compare his first and second attempts to present it coherently (in 1842 and 1844) with the Origin, I think it is equally plausible that some very different theory of evolution Read More ›

Phosphorus accumulation changed that, according to a new study. From Ben Brumfield at Georgia Tech News Center: For three billion years or more, the evolution of the first animal life on Earth was ready to happen, practically waiting in the wings. But the breathable oxygen it likely required wasn’t there, and a lack of simple nutrients may have been to blame. Then came a fierce planetary metamorphosis. Roughly 800 million years ago, in the late Proterozoic Eon, phosphorus, a chemical element essential to all life, began to accumulate in shallow ocean zones near coastlines widely considered to be the birthplace of animals and other complex organisms, according to a new study by geoscientists from the Georgia Institute of Technology and Read More ›

A friend writes to tell us of an insightful article in Nature: It emerges that a dogfish shark’s spine becomes stiffer as the fish swims faster, enabling the animal to swim efficiently at different speeds. The finding could also provide inspiration for the design of robotic biomaterials. (paywall) – Biomaterials: Sharks shift their spine into high gear Matthew A. Kolmann & Adam P. Summers, Nature, 14 December 2016 | doi:10.1038/nature21102, More. The friend believes that the shark’s cartilaginous skeleton should not be thought of, as it often is, as primitive, but as an intelligent use of materials that enable high-speed bursts of movement. As the author put it, the skeleton is “an aquatic equivalent of continuously variable transmission, a type Read More ›

From Suzan Mazur at Huffington Post: What a lovely way to end 2016 and ring in 2017 . . . a note from the head of Royal Society Scientific Programmes on behalf of President Sir Venkatraman Ramakrishnan advising that the public discussion from the recent “new trends” in evolution conference will be posted shortly online on the Royal Society event webpage. The discourse in evolution science has come a long way in the past year and the Royal Society’s decision to recognize that the circle has been drawn wider and a new integrated evolutionary synthesis has emerged is indeed a reason to celebrate. More. Yes, well, speaking on behalf of the Grinch Who Stole Christmas, I (O’Leary for News) see Read More ›

Q & A to follow on main page. That’s what we are all waiting for. Received this, this morning: (Note that authors may redact some materials – highlighted in red in body of letter below.) Scientific Meetings <scientific.meetings@royalsociety.org> 6:47 AM (1 hour ago) to Scientific Dear Participant, Thank you for attending the recent Discussion Meeting ‘New trends in evolutionary biology: biological, philosophical and social science perspectives’. Apologies if you receive this message and were not able to attend. With the speakers’ permission we have made the audio of the presentations at the meeting available on the event webpage. At the request of attendees we would also like to publish the Q&A sessions on the event webpage. If you would prefer any Read More ›

From Mark Anderson at New Scientist: First test of rival to Einstein’s gravity kills off dark matter A controversial approach to gravity that challenges Albert Einstein and suggests dark matter doesn’t exist has passed its first test. … Now, a team of astronomers studying the distribution of matter in more than 30,000 galaxies say their observations can be explained by an alternative theory that does away with dark matter. If this “modified gravity” is correct, it would up-end hundreds of years of fundamental physics. … To their surprise, they discovered the observed lensing could just as readily be accounted for by a new model of gravity, without invoking dark matter. More. From Dominic Basuto at Sydney Morning Herald: In her Read More ›

12 PhD positions in the Research Training Group “Evolutionary Processes in Adaptation and Disease” (EvoPAD): PhD projects in Biology, Medicine, and Philosophy Start: 1st April 2017. 3-year positions (TV-L E13 65 %) The new DFG-funded Research Training Group “Evolutionary Processes in Adaptation and Disease” (EvoPAD, GRK 2220) unites biological, medical, and philosophical research at the University of Münster, Germany. The core idea is to use the theory of evolution to understand processes leading to adaptation and/or disease. 12 PhD students will work on advancing evolutionary theory, and in turn, apply modern evolutionary approaches to medical questions. EvoPAD doctoral researchers will perform cutting-edge research in an interdisciplinary environment. Our multidisciplinary qualification program is tailored to individual career tracks, and offers opportunities for Read More ›

From commenter J-Mac at “Royal Society accused of breach of public trust re evolution conference”: For failing to make public comments on the recent meeting on rethinking evolution available: — The way I see it it’s a public humiliation and a great waste of taxpayers funds, nothing else. RS has claimed that there are new trends in evolution or as many of them put it; the trends were supposed to lead to the “Third Way” of explaining the complexity of life on earth other than creation or neo-darwinism. (I’m not even going to mention what would happen if RS meet had at least one piece of their agenda of the origins of life, because I would have any more terms Read More ›

For failing to make public comments on the recent meeting on rethinking evolution available. From James McAllister at Environmental Evolution: Dear members of the Scientific Programmes team, As one of the participating audience members in the recent Royal Society meeting, New trends in evolutionary biology: biological, philosophical and social science perspectives, I am greatly disappointed to find that the audio recordings made available of the meeting on your site omit the questions and comments from the audience and the responses of the presenters. While the presentations and round tables present good and valuable information, I found that the audience participation segments invaluable in understanding how various persons can approach the data from very different perspectives. I believe that these omitted segments Read More ›

Special issue on Evolutionary Patterns here. Abstract from guest editorial introduction: The natural world demonstrates signs of spatial–temporal order, an order that appears to us through a series of recognizable, recurring and consecutive patterns, i.e. regularities in forms, functions, behaviors, events and processes. These patterns lend insight into the modes and tempos of evolution and thus into the units, levels, and mechanisms that underlie the evolutionary hierarchy. Contributors to this special issue analyze converging patterns in the biological and sociocultural realm across and beyond classic divisions between micro- and macro-evolution; horizontal/reticulate and vertical evolution; phylogeny, ontogeny and ecology; synchronic and diachronic sociocultural and linguistic research; and tree and network diagrams. Explanations are sought in complexity theory, major transitions of evolution, and Read More ›

Are they or are they not life forms? Note that the article on giant viruses, abstracted below, is public access. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science: Special section on Understanding viruses: Philosophical investigations For example, Understanding viruses: Philosophical investigations: Viruses have been virtually absent from philosophy of biology. In this editorial introduction, we explain why we think viruses are philosophically important. We focus on six issues (the definition of viruses, the individuality and diachronic identity of a virus, the possibility to classify viruses into species, the question of whether viruses are living, the question of whether viruses are organisms, and finally the biological roles of viruses in ecology and evolution), and we show how they relate to classic questions Read More ›

From Suzan Mazur at Huffington Post: Censorship? Ineptness? Budgetary concerns? Whatever the problem is at the Royal Society, its Scientific Programmes office reversed its decision to post the public Q&A part of the recent “new trends” in evolution summit. The public discussion was one-third of the proceedings and considered “critical” to the event’s success. What’s more the Scientific Programmes office now denies that it ever said it intended to post the public discussion. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in travel expenses were likely spent by an audience of roughly 300 people to PARTICIPATE. Indeed, the Royal Society addressed attendees in correspondence as “Dear Participant” as well as in the meeting program.More. Skinny from News: The Royal Society meet was hijacked Read More ›