Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Father of neo-Darwinism (Fisher’s theorem) Ronald Fisher critiqued at his own memorial?

R. A. Fischer.jpg
Ronald Fisher, 1890-1962

From Sal Cordova at Creation-Evolution Headlines:

Bill Basener and John Sanford recently provided a correction to Fisher’s equations in the FNSF-FTNS (12/22/17) that demonstrated real evolution proceeds toward destruction rather than construction of biological function. It basically flips Fisher’s theorem upside down.

Concurrently, and equally comedic, something odd happened at the 37th memorial lecture on January 4, 2018 meant to honor the memory of the late R. A. Fisher. Joe Felsenstein (a National Academy of Science member) condemned Fisher’s work with faint praise. Basically, he criticized Fisher’s famous theorem but tried to do it in a nice way. (After all, this was a memorial lecture intended to honor Fisher’s accomplishments.) As with many eulogies, Felsenstein tried to put as much whitewash on the failures of the deceased individual as possible. More.

In the lecture, Felsenstein puts a brave face on the matter by saying

The models are somewhat absurdly oversimple, but I argue that models like this at least can give us some results, which decades of more handwavy papers on the general connection between evolution, entropy, and information have not.

Moral: It takes a long time to turn a big ship around. That’s just the technical part; never mind the cultural angst and political dramas.

See also: On Basener and Sanford’s paper falsifying Fisher’s Darwinism theorem: It will be no small thing to make reality matter again

Fisher’s proof of Darwinism flipped: Basener replies to Erasmus Wiffball: Fisher attempted to prove that Mendelian genetics logically must lead to a Darwinist evolution. He believed that he was successful and along the way he (co)invented population genetics and modern statistics. However, took 40-80 years for people to realize he did not achieve his original goal.

Fisher’s Proof of Darwinism Flipped: William Basener replies to Bob O’Hara. The mutation rate used in the paper is 1 mutation per generation. As with all the parameters in the paper we chose this parameter so that if there is any bias, the parameter selection favors selection and increasing fitness.

“Fisher’s Proof of Darwinism Has Been Flipped” paper is making waves – Twitter displeased


Fisher’s proof of Darwinian evolution has been flipped?


Leave a Reply