Remember Suzan Mazur, who risked all on the Altenberg 16 and has a new book out on origin of life timewasters?
Well, it turns out that, in the era of genomics and epigenomics, lots of people besides us have gotten sick of Darwinblather, however inspired or funded. What’s not to get sick of?:
The vast majority of people believe that there are only two alternative ways to explain the origins of biological diversity. One way is Creationism that depends upon intervention by a divine Creator. That is clearly unscientific because it brings an arbitrary supernatural force into the evolution process. The commonly accepted alternative is Neo-Darwinism, which is clearly naturalistic science but ignores much contemporary molecular evidence and invokes a set of unsupported assumptions about the accidental nature of hereditary variation. Neo-Darwinism ignores important rapid evolutionary processes such as symbiogenesis, horizontal DNA transfer, action of mobile DNA and epigenetic modifications. Moreover, some Neo-Darwinists have elevated Natural Selection into a unique creative force that solves all the difficult evolutionary problems without a real empirical basis. Many scientists today see the need for a deeper and more complete exploration of all aspects of the evolutionary process.
And get this: A vehicle for new voices.
The web site therefore intends to present a wide variety of novel views about evolution but does not necessarily endorse any of them. Our goal is simply to make new thinking about evolution available in one place on the web.
Now, that’s revolutionary. It sounds like they are people who want to learn something rather than defend some dead idea.
Note: I had expected to continue religion coverage (it’s Sunday here in EST) but may choose to run those stacked stories later in the evening. They are interesting—but this feels much more so just now. Thoughts? – O’Leary for News
Follow UD News at Twitter!