If humans stopped picking them, would the green ones just start becoming more numerous again?
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.
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…
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.
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?
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.
Including the world’s first cloned cat who looked nothing like the one she was identical to…
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.
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).
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.”
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.
Fine-tuning in biology shouldn’t be surprising. Why should biology be different from the rest of the universe?
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 International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB) offers a presentation on the genes that just appear from nowhere, orphan genes.
It’s not enough that DNA is a language but now it has proofreaders? Keep moving along, folks, no design to see here…