Evolution quotes 15 Apr 2010 Natural Selection is not Evolution. Yet, ever since the the two words have been in common use, the theory of Natural Selection has been employed as a convenient abbreviation for the theory of Evolution by means of Natural Selection, put forward by Darwin and Wallace. [Ronald Aylmer Fisher, The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, 1930: 1] Evolution History Quotes EvolutionHistoryQuotes
Evolution Why do scientific theories work? The inherent problem 18 Jun 2008 In an interesting post, Think Gene poses what they call “the inherent problem” of scientific theories: The inherent problem of scientific theories is that there exists an infinite equally valid explanations. Why? Because unlike in mathematics, we never have perfect information in science. … OK, so our world understanding improves… Read More
Ecology and Biodiversity How is a species like a soup can? 22 Oct 200818 Sep 2017 That is not a riddle, or rather it’s not meant to be, but it’s a question worth asking about the barcoding project. Wired has a nicely written piece about the rationale and program of giving species DNA barcodes and using the gene chosen as the barcode to identify the number… Read More
Evolution Sociobiology 3: Kin selection and pluralist explanations 19 Nov 200718 Sep 2017 [The third in a series on a recent paper by David Sloan Wilson and Edward O. Wilson. Post 1; Post 2] In presenting a group selectionist account of sociobiology, Wilson and Wilson argue that alternatives such as kin selection are not really alternatives. Read More
Also, isn’t it about time we dispense with the ‘natural’ part and just leave it as ‘selection’? There’s no fundamental difference between ‘natural’ and ‘artificial’ selection anyway, as humans are nowadays well accepted [by reasonable people] to be as much part of nature as anything else. There’s only one selection, the ‘natural’ is rather superfluous IMO… Added to the equation of selection with evolution is also the utter neglect of non-selective processes and a rather horrible teaching thereof at lower levels (drift is generally taught as this unimportant thing that happens only in remote endangered species populations or something…), and get the epic facepalm that is the inability even of some professional biologists to grasp evolution properly…
Whether or not it is of significance for our understanding of organic evolution, there is a reasonably clear distinction between artificial and natural selection. In cases of the former there is an effective intention to influence the relative frequencies of different types in a population. In cases of the latter, intentions do not play such a role.
Yeah, but what did this Fisher guy know, eh? I mean, he wasn’t even a biologist – he was a bloody mathematician! and a theologian. Just like Dembski. They both even invented concepts of information (hm, actually Fisher was a bit of a waster, only inventing one).
Putting Darwin on a pedestal and proclaiming him to be the saviour of biology certainly didn’t help in getting this across to the public at large..