tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post6318640687469185099..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Extending evolutionary theory? - Patrick BatesonLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-24207308790507921132018-06-19T01:49:17.726-04:002018-06-19T01:49:17.726-04:00Why do people get so cranky when they differ in op...Why do people get so cranky when they differ in opinion. Read Darwin's response to his critics in the 'Miscellaneous Objections' chapter. You'll never see such polite and gentlemanly responses in today's debates. It always comes down to name calling and accusations of 'nonsense." Or "what the hell is he talking about?" Can you imagine Darwin calling 'nonsense' to one of his critics? Never. Bruce Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07445797979784972815noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-14183879813994710552016-10-07T04:08:04.712-04:002016-10-07T04:08:04.712-04:00The last 30 or so years have seen many studies of ...The last 30 or so years have seen many studies of phenotypic plasticity, including the heritability of the reaction to the environment. 'Adaptability' can be treated within quantitative genetics in exactly the samen way as invariant traits. Actually, animal breeders do this routinely ...<br /><br />Bateson knows this. What the hell is he talking about? Do the neo-darwinists he mentions actually exist? Larry Moran might ask him who he means by 'neo-darwinist' and ask him to provide an example from the recent literature. <br />Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10384316385523253372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-16066705951522128612016-10-06T17:45:39.053-04:002016-10-06T17:45:39.053-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jmachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04392421995310271733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-44486510550003377742016-10-05T18:32:10.469-04:002016-10-05T18:32:10.469-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jmachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04392421995310271733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-90076888626529582542016-10-04T18:13:46.165-04:002016-10-04T18:13:46.165-04:00What nonsense? Be specific.What nonsense? Be specific.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09481645265615126897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-90097358572661732442016-10-04T17:43:24.889-04:002016-10-04T17:43:24.889-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jmachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04392421995310271733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-39483027584266131062016-10-04T17:41:39.711-04:002016-10-04T17:41:39.711-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jmachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04392421995310271733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-26037322925214600122016-10-04T13:56:09.596-04:002016-10-04T13:56:09.596-04:00I agree. The lack of knowledge in the realm of mo...I agree. The lack of knowledge in the realm of molecular biology opens them up to some very obvious and pointed questions. The ability of the genome to change gene expression in response to environmental stimuli is entirely neo-Darwinian, so I don't know what clothes Sir Bateson is asking us to shed. If these gene networks that evolve through neo-Darwinian mechanisms increase the rate at which a lineage evolves, then we once again have to wonder why we need to get rid of neo-Darwinian mechanisms.<br /><br />We also see the same EES strawman theme echoed by Sir Bateson. Neo-Darwinian theory has never required the organism to be "essentially passive", contrary to Sir Bateson's claims.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09481645265615126897noreply@blogger.com