Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Genetics

Retroviruses and Common Descent: And Why I Don’t Buy It

Those of you who have been following this blog, as well as Evolution News & Views, for some time, will be aware that I have previously discussed, across multiple articles, the phenomenon of endogenous retroviral inserts into the genomes of primates. Those familiar with the debate over origins will also be familiar with the various arguments for common descent which are based upon these fascinating genetic elements. A friend recently asked me if I would compile my thoughts on the topic into a single article, and hence that is what I intend to do here. Since my previous articles on the topic (and since my progression from undergraduate to postgraduate status), my knowledge of the subject has increased and I Read More ›

Geneticist W.-E. Loennig replies to Darwinist Nick Matzke: Which is more important: Darwin or facts?

Why does Nick not answer Nachtwey's questions on the evolution of Utricularia's trap? Suction in half a millisecond: How did the trap become watertight and functional as a suction trap with all its synorganized anatomical and physiological details by a series of random 'micromutations' with slight or even invisible effects on the phenotype (Mayr)? Read More ›

Genetics paper retracted: “Some other mechanism” is responsible for genetic mutations

In “Genetics Paper Retracted: Due to statistical errors, a Science paper claiming that mutation is responsible for genetic variation is retracted” (The Scientist September 2, 2011), Jessica P. Johnson reports, A May 2010 Science paper showing that the most genetically fit cow-pea weevils have fewer deleterious genetic mutations in their genomes than their less fit counterparts was retracted yesterday (September 1) by the authors because of flaws in their statistical analysis. The results apparently supported the hypothesis that individuals with the fewest bad mutations will produce the most fit offspring. The revised data analysis, which shows little effect on fitness due to mutation, suggests that some other mechanism may instead be responsible for maintaining genetic variation in weevil populations. Wonder Read More ›

New research: People differ in their genetic makeup more in big ways than small ones

The question isn’t whether Darwinism can “explain” this, but whether Darwinism is even relevant any more. It may have been relevant in the days of the Central Dogma, but ... in the story about bacterial “spite” or long range planning among horses, Darwinism is only explaining itself - in increasingly bizarre ways. Read More ›