There is a very interesting discussion going on at Sandwalk regarding adaptationism vs. ... whatever that other thing is that Larry believes in.
But seriously, it is a very interesting discussion that is shaping up as a debate between John Hawks, who wrote a post on this topic recently, and Larry.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
There is an interesting post on The Intersection called Civility and the New Atheists, by Chris Mooney. In the post, Chris reviews Barbara Forrest's statements that in engaging int he cross-world-view debate (scientists vs. creationists, atheists, vs religion, etc.) one should maintian etiquette…
Climate Hawks Votes is running a primary in which you can chose either Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, or No Endorsement.
The web page where you can vote is here. You are required to enter some identifying information in order to eliminate or significantly reduced gaming of the poll, so the…
This google news query should get you to popular press articles. I'll start putting links to blogs when more come in.
Blogs: One of the lead authors, John Hawks, promises lots of commentary this week. Greg Laden has some questions regarding the demographic assumptions. Steve Sailer with a round-…
Recently a few blogs I follow have been having a back and forth "debate" which seem to recapitulate in the most general sense the "selectionist vs. neutralist" debates of the 1970s.
Three posts from p-ter:
Do phenotypes evolve neutrally?
More on adaptation
Final Thoughts on adaptation
From Larry:…
No organism is ever "perfectly adapted" for the environment. Additionally, the founder effect and genetic drift are also very important in population genetics, to assume everything comes down to natural selection is to ignore far too much research.