I was thinking of doing something with this paper, but dang it, Omics! Omics! beat me to it. Read it anyway…I suppose there might be some other science in the universe left for me.
More like this
Keith Robison from Omics! Omics! has a fun nostalgia piece looking back on his days in the midst of the genomics bubble of the late 90s.
Ralf Neumann has interpreted my fascination with -omics as distaste for neologisms:
Just when I start to think that maybe, just maybe, I could stop worrying and learn to love the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM, with apologies to Stanley Kubrick and Peter Sellers
Huh? Al Franken has announced he's running for Senate, and you're posting about genes and flippers? You haven't had your coffee yet, have you?
PZ: WRITE SOMETHING, would you? Links to what other people have done are neither big nor clever.
He is writing something, Ben. He's writing his book. So chill.
I am not a fan of the arguments given in that link. It is not that I do not agree with the general reasoning, but rather that I think it avoid actual creationist arguments and point-of-views. Doing so is a bit of a strawman, and is not up to good standards as far as I can see...
It is true the fossil record does suggest a common origin, most likely from Acanthodians, of both the limbs of chondrichthyans and Osteichthyans (if you care to use that name), but a loss of a developmental mechanism in one group relative to another, if it had occured, should not been seen as any type of doom to evolutionary theory.
In short, shit happens..