Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
Yesterday I posted a long critique of a misguided article from the Guardian arguing that the modern theory of evolution is obsolete and needs to be replaced. One of my comments is that the article seemed say that the claim that evolution needs to be expanded by incorporating phenomena like epigenetics, niche construction, and plasticity … Continue reading Pinker: The “evolution war” is also a culture war
This article in the Guardian really says nothing new beyond what a dozen articles have said already: “There are things we know about evolution that Darwin never imagined, and we’ve made many discoveries that weren’t part of the ‘modern synthetic theory of evolution’ forged in the Thirties and Forties.” I’ve posted a ton about these … Continue reading Once again: A misguided article on why the theory of evolution is obsolete
Yes, the folks who want evolutionary biology to be radically expanded to take into account phenomena like development, “niche construction,” culture, and epigenetics are at it again, and again they have nothing to offer but a few lab examples mixed with a lot of hype. And the promoter of this view is once again Kevin … Continue reading Laland at it again: touts a “radically different” account of evolution
UPDATE: I forgot to add this bit from Welch’s paper about the John Templeton Foundation: It is remarkable, for example, that much of the funding for challenging current practice in evolutionary biology comes from The John Templeton Foundation (Pennisi 2016), which is committed to using science to reveal underlying purpose, and rejecting what Nagel (2012) … Continue reading Why do some scientists always claim that evolutionary biology needs urgent and serious reform?
For some time, a group of biologists have been promoting the idea that the Modern Synthetic Theory of Evolution (which they call “Standard Evolutionary Theory,” or SET) is incomplete in major ways, and needs a reboot. Their main contention is that the SET is too “gene-centric”, and ignores environmental factors—like non-genetic developmental plasticity, epigenetic modification, and ‘niche … Continue reading Templeton wastes $11 million in attempt to change evolutionary biology
Read this and we’ll be done with Dobbs, unless he proffers another overhyped piece of science journalism. Over at Richard Dawkins’s own site, he’s responded to Dobbs’s misguided critique of the “gene-centered” view of evolution as described in The Selfish Gene. Richard’s piece is called “Adversarial journalism and the selfish gene.” He’s remarkably polite for a … Continue reading Dawkins responds to Dobbs
You’re probably familiar with this contretemps, recently described last Friday in the New York Times. The philosophy journal Synthese published an issue on “Evolution and its rivals,” which, among other pieces, contained an article by philosopher Barbara Forrest criticizing the work of another philosopher, Francis Beckwith. Forrest rightly called out Beckwith for his sympathies with … Continue reading Mark Vernon at the Guardian: What’s wrong with intelligent design?
