Amazon founder Jeff Bezos must be lovin’ every minute.
Well, it’s become quite the discussion now because, as Spetner explains here at Evolution News & Views:
David E. Levin, who teaches in the Department of Molecular & Cell Biology at Boston University’s School of Dental Medicine, wrote an emotional negative review of my latest book, The Evolution Revolution, for the online journal Reports of the National Center for Science Education. He also posted it on my book’s Amazon page.
Spetner replied (See Lee Spetner defends non-random evolution from Darwin lobby)
Then Levin replied on the pages of the venerable journal Amazon, dialoguing with commenter Les:
I especially like the example of the evolution of the antifreeze gene of Antarctic Notothenioid fish (in part because it’s accepted by well known ID proponent Michael Behe). The evolutionary history of this gene is well documented. The new gene arose from the non-coding region of a gene encoding a digestive enzyme through the accumulation of a series of random mutations that were selected for serially in the context of a cooling Antarctic. The antifreeze gene is now essential to the survival of these fish. So, this is just one well documented example of how evolution increases order (or adds information) to a genome.
By the way, this directly contradicts Spetner’s assertion that there are no examples of random mutations that increase information in the genome.
Spetner replies today at Evolution News & Views,
How does one know that a mutation has occurred and how does one know it is random? If two closely related species have similar proteins or DNA, Darwinists assume the differences in the sequences represent random mutations that occurred in the evolutionary divergence of the species. No one knows that those genetic changes were random — they are simply declared random according to the dogma of the Modern Synthesis (MS).
The MS, however, currently faces intense scrutiny. As a replacement for the MS, some now offer the Extended Synthesis (ES), presently in formation. The ES suggests that genetic changes can occur in response to environmental stimuli. This is what I proposed twenty years ago with my nonrandom evolutionary hypothesis (NREH). But my hypothesis goes further than the ES is willing to go. More.
Over to Levin.
See also: Lee Spetner defends non-random evolution from Darwin lobby: “Lamarck’s theory lacked a mechanism and for that reason was not accepted. The mechanism for the NREH is described in the book and is backed by evidence.”
Follow UD News at Twitter!