tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post4599954275009379418..comments2024-03-28T02:54:46.537-04:00Comments on The TOF Spot: Post-Darwinian EvolutionTheOFloinnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-53507331801260767782015-12-20T22:40:54.456-05:002015-12-20T22:40:54.456-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.ratna14141@gmail.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04066264462533373056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-25672128612719215932015-05-08T04:59:36.843-04:002015-05-08T04:59:36.843-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09019473502893606013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-15798042320073063392015-03-30T05:36:00.693-04:002015-03-30T05:36:00.693-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06066294653425195089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-46271085324534225832014-02-15T18:27:42.544-05:002014-02-15T18:27:42.544-05:00Isn't that what the Ascians of Gene Wolfe'...Isn't that what the Ascians of Gene Wolfe's Soar Cycle are? Essentially a type of human locust? E.H. Munrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09038816873823422488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-39814141299577767862014-02-04T13:28:04.067-05:002014-02-04T13:28:04.067-05:00Great! I've already bookmarked your site, I th...Great! I've already bookmarked your site, I think it may be worthwile for us to follow it as well.Michele Forastierehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08396638290269124746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-91326628491732808992014-02-04T13:24:50.132-05:002014-02-04T13:24:50.132-05:00Well, thanks for the suggestion! BTW, I think I...Well, thanks for the suggestion! BTW, I think I'm going to order a few of your books... I used to be an SF fan, and they look interesting!Michele Forastierehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08396638290269124746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-84188592433968924772014-02-02T13:02:23.061-05:002014-02-02T13:02:23.061-05:00I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments of the ...I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments of the post from Michele. I would love to see the translations though, they sound very interesting and may help with my own research on alternatives to Darwinian evolution ( http://diggingupthefuture.com ). The post seems to want to make me anonymous - sorry about that. My name is Maria Brigit. Thanks for info and continued discussions<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-2805674528138383862014-02-01T19:12:53.836-05:002014-02-01T19:12:53.836-05:00You beat me to it. Not my favorite Bear, but stil...You beat me to it. Not my favorite Bear, but still, pretty neat.Gary Keith Chestertonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-24098475577904150822014-02-01T19:11:48.157-05:002014-02-01T19:11:48.157-05:00Greg Bear's "Darwin's Radio" use...Greg Bear's "Darwin's Radio" uses a kind of a similar idea, though not with zombies. Gary Keith Chestertonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-26516862137951197722014-02-01T10:45:17.200-05:002014-02-01T10:45:17.200-05:00OTOH, you may want to contact Dr. Shapiro directly...OTOH, you may want to contact Dr. Shapiro directly, at Chicago.TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-45540799473259786552014-02-01T09:43:25.625-05:002014-02-01T09:43:25.625-05:00Dear Dr. Flynn,
a few days ago a friend of mine t...Dear Dr. Flynn,<br /><br />a few days ago a friend of mine told me about this post, and it was an extremely pleasant surprise! Let me say that I find your standpoint deeply appealing - having much in common with my own - and your way of arguing very stimulating and enjoyable.<br /><br />I'm an Italian physicist and, currently, a high-school teacher of math and physics, who a few years ago started to wonder if Darwinism was, after all, the ANSWER to every single biological question. By “Darwinism”, of course, I mean the overarching paradigm that is well represented by Monod's “Chance and Necessity” concept.<br /><br />Consider that here, in Italy, the Darwinian point of view is the overwhelmingly dominant paradigm in science education and popularization. There are a few notable exceptions (like Sermonti and Piattelli-Palmarini), but in general there's no escape: any Italian child who takes interest in biological science is doomed to imbibe with Neo-Darwinian thinking along all of his life.<br /><br />From time to time, however, a few scientifically educated people start asking questions. In some cases, they even start trying to tell other people, by writing books or through the web. One of them, in particular, keeps a very active blog (http://www.enzopennetta.it/), with which I also cooperate. A few months ago, for example, we succeeded in contacting dr. Henry Stapp (a world-wide renowned physicist, who has postulated a Whiteheadian quantum ontology), who kindly gave us the permission to publish the Italian translations of his public domain papers (like this: http://www.enzopennetta.it/2013/05/teoria-quantistica-della-coscienza/). Just recently, we also contacted dr. Edward Feser, who kindly agreed to let us publish the translation of one of his philosophical papers (http://www.enzopennetta.it/2013/11/teleologia-una-guida-allacquisto/).<br /><br />What I am asking you, then, is your kind permission to publish an Italian translation of this post on our blog, obviously with a direct link to the original text. Due to the clarity and effectiveness of your argumentation, we believe it would help to show the scientific and epistemological weaknesses of the Neo-Darwinian concept.<br /><br />I await your kind reply (possibly at my contact email address).<br /><br />Best regards.Michele Forastierehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08396638290269124746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-57249813836177988732014-01-30T20:58:52.873-05:002014-01-30T20:58:52.873-05:00He doesn't specifically credit Mr. Blyth (or e...He doesn't specifically credit Mr. Blyth (or even mention him as you say) in the area of artificial / natural selection. But he did generally hold him in high regard as a source of information; somewhere around page 24, give or take, though a search through this non-paginated text turns up Blyth at several other points too.<br />http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1228/1228-h/1228-h.htmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-6109671105137748372014-01-30T19:08:39.124-05:002014-01-30T19:08:39.124-05:00Is't so? Then I stand corrected.Is't so? Then I stand corrected.TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-33454777181315940782014-01-30T18:50:29.118-05:002014-01-30T18:50:29.118-05:00But Darwin does mention Blyth. And finds speaks v...But Darwin does mention Blyth. And finds speaks very nicely of him; in the early pages of his very first edition! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-91082740434945936162014-01-26T15:52:14.621-05:002014-01-26T15:52:14.621-05:00It sounds like Shapiro is the Establishment guy an...It sounds like Shapiro is the Establishment guy and Goren is the outsider.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04720409839023747889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-54232018737994102542014-01-26T14:23:57.128-05:002014-01-26T14:23:57.128-05:00Yes, here I have both found the antidote and be an...Yes, here I have both found the antidote and be an antidote by contributing a little to the conversation - I really love this discussion and feel I have finally found a blog which is discussing the new evolutionary ideas without forcing you to be a Creationist/Intelligent Design proponent and/or, such an avid supporter of the Darwinian paradigm that you can't get a word in edgewise without getting accused of heresy. I have been fighting a lone battle of late on my blog http://diggingupthefuture.com with some of these, but mainly I would like to share a great deal of research with anyone who is interested regarding a whole new (very non-Darwinian) way of looking at evolution in the light of the most up-to-date research, which has not really filtered into the mainstream as yet, AKA Shapiro's mechanisms such as natural genetic engineering as explained in regular articles in Huff Post & his great book: a view from the 21st century, combined with the new epigenetic synthesis. Interestingly I have also posted blogs with titles similar to the above post such as 'If we share half our DNA with bananas, does that make us half banana? http://diggingupthefuture.com/2014/01/16/huffington-post-did-first-placental-mammal-live-alongside-dinosaurs-scientists-cant-agree-a-response/<br /> Like this blogspot, I have kept the information humorous and light - Again thanks for all the comments and blog spot info.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-59413836588076913322014-01-26T13:10:39.600-05:002014-01-26T13:10:39.600-05:00TOF - I just want to express my admiration for you...TOF - I just want to express my admiration for your blog. I'm very glad to have found it recently, and you have edified me in many ways.<br /><br />I also recently finished Eifelheim, albeit via audiobook (so I did not catch everything), and really enjoyed it. Would have liked to have more scenes with Sharon talking physics!<br /><br />Thanks,<br />EdEdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06877019716219367152noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-65536301694903090322014-01-25T23:00:55.184-05:002014-01-25T23:00:55.184-05:00So I decided to read the comments section of that ...So I decided to read the comments section of that article (yes, yes, I know) and the environment was distinctly hostile not only to Shapiro but to "wendell read", his defender, who was driven down by accusations of "creationism" and (horrors!) teleology.<br /><br />Shapiro, it seems, is a 'renegade'. This makes me curious: where in the scientific community can I find support for his views? Is there a sensible antidote to A Certain Famous Blog?LorenzoCanucknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-90057718081911610262014-01-25T18:40:08.822-05:002014-01-25T18:40:08.822-05:00Seems like Greg Bear anticipated this (again, as u...Seems like Greg Bear anticipated this (again, as usual) in _Darwin's Radio_.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16638030718029760972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-41398124243855178012014-01-24T15:20:42.111-05:002014-01-24T15:20:42.111-05:00What if we discovered that humans and chimps do no...What if we discovered that humans and chimps do not share 99% of their genes but 99.9999999999999% of them? Would that then mean that a. the tiny difference is responsible for the actual difference between chimps and humans or b. that genes can not possibly have as much to do with determining physical form and brain potential as we think?<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-14331972134592486592014-01-24T13:31:59.087-05:002014-01-24T13:31:59.087-05:00Ah! Your evolution-fu is stronger than mine!
Nic...Ah! Your evolution-fu is stronger than mine! <br /><br />Nice blind fish. <br /><br />"actualize potentialities already present in the genome". And those potentialities got there by "natural genetic engineering". I'd buy that. In fact, I think I did already. One way to put it is that natural selection is built upon several billion years of natural genetic engineering. Another way, the way I have generally thought about it, is that the first huge and most important part of natural selection is that by means of which the working of the individual cell were worked out - which would include all the replication, expression, error correction - and teleology. The threat that a tampering deity and final causes might be required to make sense of this never bothered me anyway. <br /><br />My only question: in what sense does the fact that genes interact with their environment mean they are not 'selfish'? Traits get passed on because the genes get passed on. Selection of genes is always, without exception, in some environment - which environment includes the genes neighboring and interacting with the gene in question, as well as the creatures in the swamp, and the genes in the other creatures in the swamp, and so on. Still, midst the dizzying complexity and layers of interactions, the gene is still what gets selected. Otherwise, the trait doesn't get passed on. That's all I've ever understood by 'selfish'. <br /><br />Finally, I've long though that gradualism versus punctuated equilibrium was obscuring the point. Is there ever an non-punctuated state? Isn't that just something we assume when we see a similar form appear over a long lime? All kinds of 'punctuations' have likely occurred in the Coelacanth's environment over 400 million years, right? I guess it's paid for the upgrade to puncture-proof equilibrium. How fast or slow is 'gradual' anyway? It just seems unhelpful. What does seem helpful - and true - is the idea that creatures have evolved, or more properly, been selected (or, perhaps even more properly, been naturally genetically engineered) to evolve - that the lizards and locusts and cichlids each contain a genetic history of billions of years of evolution, and a toolkit of once and future useful genes. Joseph Moorehttp://yardsaleofthemind.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-73863607563340201402014-01-24T12:04:54.790-05:002014-01-24T12:04:54.790-05:00This sounds very much like a claim that the Darwin...<i>This sounds very much like a claim that the Darwinian "framework" (i.e., "metaphysic") is not falsifiable, since one may always cook up a Just-So Story within it.</i><br /><br />Or as I like to put it, it does no good to say that Darwinian evolution "could" do something. To have an explanation, you need to show that it *would* do it. <br /><br />Otherwise you're really just relying on chance, and pretty much any possible observation could, in principle, be explained (away) by chance.The Deucehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09664665914768916965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-77034802949267078102014-01-24T08:37:47.325-05:002014-01-24T08:37:47.325-05:00And what about zombies? Are they the human locust...And what about zombies? Are they the human locusts that result when overcrowding causes our genomes to be reread differently?<br /><br />That would be great SF, an idea that doesn't make my head explode so much as fall clean off. But between the idea and the reality, there's some fairly epic labor, no? Xena Catolicanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-84152501566772389042014-01-24T08:35:28.769-05:002014-01-24T08:35:28.769-05:00I definitely see what you mean but I'm afraid ...I definitely see what you mean but I'm afraid you are missing part of the point of the argument, which is that evolutionary changes can occur rapidly (sometimes observably rapidly). We have seen evolution happen within our lifetime. The development of anti-biotic resistant germs is a example. John F. Triolonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-56725125663503852202014-01-24T00:39:13.874-05:002014-01-24T00:39:13.874-05:00"Falling Bodies and Evolutions are Facts"..."Falling Bodies and Evolutions are Facts"<br /><br />Surely, the facts here are fossils. That the fossils belong to million year old animals is a theory, and that these million year old animals are ancestors of present day animals is another theory. <br />Thus, evolution is as much of theory as the mechanism behind evolution. Gyanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09941686166886986037noreply@blogger.com