13 Replies to “Jean Staune on non-Darwinian Evolution

  1. 1
    DaveScot says:

    There’s a sound bite size response I hadn’t heard yet.

    Darwin Apologist: The appearance of design is an illusion.
    Design Apologist: No, the appearance of randomness is the illusion.

    Somehow I find that exchange quite amusing. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.

  2. 2
    DaveScot says:

    LOL! The Pluto anecdote is just precious. I spit my coffee when I read “Dichael Menton”.

  3. 3
    Thunar says:

    Help me out here, I cannot get to the pdf. What is non-Darwinian Evolution?

  4. 4
    DaveScot says:

    Davison’s Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis is strong non-Darwinian evolution. I love how Bill is able to pull extraordinary articles like this one from Staune out of his hat that follow up on recent topics of conversation here. He doesn’t usually tell you they’re follow ups or expansions. You have to connect the dots yourself. He does this to me time and time again. Rather than directly respond to a comment I’ve made I see an article like this one appear that teaches me what he wants me to know. I’m very appreciative of it.

  5. 5
    DaveScot says:

    I’ve always questioned DNA’s role as sole repository of heritable information. Ostensibly there’s an unbroken cell line behind every living thing going back to an original cell. Omne vivo ex ovum – everything comes from an egg. There’s more structure to an egg than just the DNA and that structure is duplicated during cell division, not created anew via instructions in the DNA. Thus it would seem clear that heritable epigenetic information plays a role – how much role is a good question.

  6. 6
    DaveScot says:

    This is SUCH a good paper.

    Thus one can “exorcise” the “phantom of Copernicus”. The man is not any more in the center of the universe in the geographical point of view but finds, in a more subtle way, a central place as a goal of the evolution of the universe.

    Abandoning the Copernican Principle of Medicrity has been particularly difficult for me. The evidence compelling this exorcism is becoming overwhelming. One must go where the evidence leads no matter how much it stings. I still hold a forlorn hope that SETI will bear fruit…

  7. 7
    Patrick says:

    I suggest a different, even darker solution to Fermi’s Paradox. Basically, I think the aliens don’t blow themselves up; they just get addicted to computer games. They forget to send radio signals or colonize space because they’re too busy with runaway consumerism and virtual-reality narcissism.
    –Geoffrey Miller.

    πŸ˜€

  8. 8
    DaveScot says:

    Patrick

    dUdE! tHaT sUcKs!

    Seriously, did you read the Staune’s paper? I just finished. I felt like standing up and applauding in front of my computer screen. It was THAT good.

    Bill should think about becoming an editor of books about the evolution debate. πŸ˜‰

  9. 9
    Red Reader says:

    “I love how Bill is able to pull extraordinary articles like this one from Staune out of his hat that follow up on recent topics of conversation here.”

    I’ve said this before; I say it again.

    This blog should be patented as a “fully accredited post-graduate seminar”.

  10. 10
    Patrick says:

    Unfortunately was busy for most of the day with a 4 hour long business meeting…

  11. 11
    antg says:

    I fully concur with DaveScot – that was an excellent paper. I certainly get the sense that we are on the threshold of a new advance in evolutionary biology, or at least Neo-Darwinism will be seen in context as a limited part of the evolutionary toolkit. I have in the last year or two of following the debate been struggling to define my position on the spectrum – especially because the debate gets so polarised. Thanks to Staune I shall now label myself as a non-Darwinian evolutionist (probably of the weak variety).

    If ID is to continue to develop into a credible school of thought they need to collaborate with these folk and not alienate them IMHO. They need to move from the big tent that contains YEC to the big tent that contains evolutionists of the type Staune describes.

    On Pluto spring is on its way…

  12. 12
    John Davison says:

    It is a very good paper. I am a little miffed I was never mentioned. I offered an alternative to the Darwinian fairy tale 22 years ago in the Journal of Theoretical Biology, 111: 724-735, 1984, Semi-meiosis as an evolutionary mechanism. I guess it wasn’t anti-Darwinian enough.

    “Meine Zeit wird schon kommen!”
    Gregor Mendel

  13. 13
    John Davison says:

    There is nothing in the Darwinian model that ever had anything to do with the emergence of a new life form, absolutely nothing. Natural Selection has historically not even been able to maintain the status quo, the only thing it ever did, which is why there has been so much extinction. That was important because without extinction there never could have been evolution. That was the only role ever played by Natural Selection, a role it is incompetent to further perform as we have altered the environment beyond the capacity of organisms to further adapt. It is extremely unlikely that there is a single organism on this planet that will ever become anything different from what it is right now. Evolution is finished. That is why a new genus has not appeared in two million years and a new species not in historical times. It is all down hill now as the Cosmic Plan has been completed with the appearance of the ultimate product, Homo sapiens, a mere 100,000 years ago. Trust me but of course you won’t. Who cares? I don’t!

Leave a Reply