We are told, by the by, that “Survival of the fittest’ phenomenon is only part of the evolution equation” — It seems that classical, orthodox Darwinism continues its downward trajectory in popularity.
Genetics
Massive new study shows that height is largely inherited
From the story, we count 50% of human height as explained by genetics, at least in persons of European ancestry. But apparently it takes 9,900 DNA markers to account for something as straightforward as height. And all that just happened randomly, we are told…
John Sanford and James Tour discuss science and faith
Dr. James Tour and Dr. John Sanford discuss science and faith, including Dr. Sanford’s challenge against the idea of natural selection benefiting the fitness of living organisms, coming as a direct result of his research on genomes showing the fitness of biological systems are degenerating due to the accumulation of harmful mutations.
If we need AlphaFold to figure out protein folding, how likely is protein folding to be a product of mere chance?
We are told by many philosophers that life came to exist on Earth purely by chance. How likely is that, given the intricacy of the machinery that governs our bodies, such that someone needs to design AlphaFold to figure it out?
Rob Sheldon on those curious DNA circles in the human body and the death of Common Descent
This little toolkit looks designed for horizontal gene transport (HGT), but there wasn’t anything similar to it for eukaryotes. Then came this article. And apparently humans (a rather sophisticated eukaryote) have circular DNA as well, it just was overlooked for 30 years.
Hey, it’s Friday night: Eleven most important cats in science
Including the world’s first cloned cat who looked nothing like the one she was identical to…
(Reformed) New Scientist takes horizontal gene transfer seriously
At New Scientist: “‘Yeast and bacteria have fundamentally different ways of turning DNA into protein, and this seemed like a really, really strange phenomenon,’ he says.” They ain’t seen nothing yet. If you subtract the “random mutation” from “natural selection,” what’s left of Darwinism? By the time the Raging Woke hammer down Darwin’s statue, chances are the New Scientist crowd will have forgotten who the old Brit toff even was. Shrug.
Cambrian Explosion may have involved new genes
Researchers: “The genetic mechanisms underlying these events are unknown, leaving a fundamental question in evolutionary biology unanswered.” and “Contradicting the current view, our study reveals that genes with bilaterian origin are robustly associated with key features in extant bilaterians, suggesting a causal relationship.” = the genes originated with the bilaterians (creatures with two distinct sides).
(Reformed) New Scientist 9: Survival of the Luckiest
At New Scientist: “But evolution can also occur through a non-adaptive process called genetic drift, whereby a gene may become dominant in a population purely by chance… ‘Genetic drift can definitely be a significant driver of evolution,’ says Miles.”
At Retraction Watch: “Transparently absurd” paper at Elsevier
Retraction Watch: Erm, about that concerning peer review process. Elsevier also was the publisher of the equally risible book chapter claiming that COVID-19 came to earth on a meteorite.
Another instance of fine-tuning in biology?
Fine-tuning in biology shouldn’t be surprising. Why should biology be different from the rest of the universe?
Jumping genes regulate the human brain’s development
Note: “these virus-like entities that have been remodeling our ancestral genome since the dawn of times,” says Didier Trono.” Right. We are told that many of the French have no use for lumpen-Darwinism. One can see why not.
The mystery of orphan genes
The International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB) offers a presentation on the genes that just appear from nowhere, orphan genes.
Researchers: Proofreading proteins prevent DNA errors
It’s not enough that DNA is a language but now it has proofreaders? Keep moving along, folks, no design to see here…
Has the genetic code for mammals gained another letter?
Or is it epigenetics? At Science: “But even if the discovery is confirmed, Peng says he is leery of calling the modified adenine an addition to the genetic code. ‘Maybe [part] of the ‘epigenetic code’ instead?'”