Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Z inside the head? Rebuttals to PZ Myers

arroba Email

Starting here, Evolution News & Views offers a 10 part series, rebutting Darwin’s man PZ “I should have been ruder” Myers – the sage of  Morris, Minnesota, on evolution and embryology. The series featuring Jonathan McLatchie and Casey Luskin, withstanding the cloud of insults and obscenities, on behalf of reason, logic, and evidence.

Myers beautifully embodies Darwinism in full flower. If humans are merely primates, then obscene and irrational bluster is merely science. What part of that do some people not understand?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

I'm somewhat shocked by the volumes that have now been written about this incident, and about a topic that isn't really at the heart of ID or Evolution. I'm a bit concerned you are obsessing a bit on PZ Myers. I'm more shocked at the selective reading of the scientific literature. Sure, there are some 8-20 year old papers that morphologically examine developmental stages, and have mixed conclusions. The more interesting data is probably the molecular data. It quite strongly demonstrates a conserved stage, and enforces the hour glass model. It isn't that you aren't aware of it- indeed, you quote from: Naoki Irie & Shigeru Kuratani, "Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals vertebrate phylotypic period during organogenesis," Nature Communications, Vol. 2:248 (2011) and Alex T. Kalinka et al. Gene expression divergence recapitulates the developmental hourglass model Nature (2010) 468 (8) 811 The titles really stand for themselves. But you choose some very selective quotes...like "both the model and the concept of the phylotypic period remain controversial subjects in the literature" in the intro of a paper trying to hype its own reason to be, and which seeks put the 'controversy' to rest-in the wrong direction for your side. Or the discussion of the 2011 paper, which you say "grasps for an evolutionary explanation that almost hints at a goal-directed evolutionary process' quoting: "How did vertebrates establish divergence of early embryogenesis while keeping pharyngular stages conserved? One reasonable deduction from this observation is that early vertebrate embryogenesis reduces the developmental fluctuations, which tend to occur around these stages, much like earthquake-resistant buildings that are built with the 'flexible structure'." But leaving out the following: "This stabilizing role of early-to-mid developmental process is consistent with a prediction of the theory called 'isologous diversification for cell differentiation' in complex systems biology34. In addition, it is important to note that developmental stages might be more or less uncoupled from each other, which would allow evolutionary changes to be introduced rather independently; indeed, adults and larvae are said to evolve and diverge independently35." Goal directed? Why? Because an engineering metaphor was invoked? And you mistake the observation that supports the model with the question that asks how this evolved. You really fail to adress the molecular data, which is is increasingly strong. DrREC
Are you saying that humans aren't primates? Grunty

Leave a Reply