Alien life in Phoenix 10 Jun 2009 I find Paul Davies, the physicist who gets quoted on everything, really annoying sometimes. This is one of those times. Davies appropriates another’s ideas (Carol Cleland’s), arguing that we should look for a “second kind of life” on earth. Then he appropriates yet another’s work (Philippa Uwin’s work on nanobes), as evidence. These are apparently organic structures that lack any nucleotides, but grow and multiply. Then he overlooks the most obvious interpretation – that nanobes are byproducts of ordinary organic chemistry. In other words, if organic life is built around chemistry that is optimised for reproduction, it is hardly surprising, and hardly evidence of an independent history or kind of life that its byproducts will do the same thing. It is a bit like the overhyped “viruses first” view of the origins of life that some try to make out. Viruses and nanobes are side effects of biology, in my view, until we have really good reasons to think otherwise. Astrobiology often gets too enthusiastic about wacko hypotheses. Evolution General Science Philosophy Science
Evolution New work on the origin of life 11 Jun 2008 I can’t say much about this without reading the paper in the company of Somebody Who Knows About Chemistry, but Jack Szostak’s team at the Harvard Medical School has done some interesting looking work on the self assembly of lipids into miscelles that could contain DNA reactions. What is new… Read More
Biology Atavisms and phylogeny 15 Sep 20094 Oct 2017 “Everybody knows” that species can lose features through evolution: snakes, whales and sea cows all lost hind limbs. But occasionally, they can “revert”, like the snake shown in the photo below, which has grown one limb. However, many people are confused as to why this happens. Read More
Evolution Going backwards, or, devolution? 29 Sep 2009 Carl Zimmer has another one of his excellent summary articles, this time about the problems encountered by a research group that tried to make a protein that had evolved into one form, evolve back to the starting point. This is being touted as a molecular version of “Dollo’s Law” (which is… Read More
Davies’ strength is, I think, in summarising the work of others. When it comes to synthesising this information to create “original research”, he seems to run with some strange tangents.
Definitely rolled my eyes when I saw that Davies was going to be a panelist at the World Science Festival in NYC this week. Just when I forget about him, he comes back and says something irritating.
Another suggestion to Davies would be that he… I dunno… revamp definitions of “life” and “living” before he suggests we can find alternative kinds of life? Last time I checked, “physical” and “replicating” were only a few of the necessary ingredients.
Chasing will o the wisps (called a spunkie intrestingly enough in Scotland) would certainly appear to be very much a part of the history of this branch of science. Stepping on star jelly was an ocupational hazard for many 18th century gentlemen and more than a few astronomers as well until a surprisingly late date. Its Erasmus Darwin who identified star jelly as birdlime in the botanic garden. A poem which appears to take an intrest in a great deal of such beliefs/theories which crowd round science in this period. One scottish minister claimed that learned gentlemen had been getting a bit over-excited with regard to the rotten tatties (potatos) found in his parish. Hopes for an E.T. Mr Potatohead would appear to have been dashed.
My last department was host to an astrobiology group. They never came along to any of the evolutionary biology talks, not even the microbial stuff. Nuff said.