The epigenetics miracle?

Jerry Coyne is mildly incensed — once again, there's a lot of
recent hype about epigenetics, and he doesn't believe it's at all revolutionary. Well, I've written about epigenetics before, I think it's an extremely important subject central to our understanding of development, and…I agree with him completely. It's important, we ought to spend more time discussing it in our classes, but it's all about the process of gene expression, not about radically changing our concepts of evolution. I like to argue that what multigenerational epigenetic effects do is blur out or modulate the effects of genetic change over time, and it might mask out or highlight allelic variation, but ultimately, it's all about the underlying genetic differences.

Coyne mentions one journalist who claims that new discoveries in epigenetics would "make Darwin swoon," which is a bizarre standard. Darwin knew next-to-nothing about genetics — he had his own weird version of Lamarckian inheritance — and wasn't even equipped to imagine molecular biology, so yes, just about anything in this field would dazzle him. My freshman introductory biology course would blow Charles Darwin away — he'd have to struggle to keep up with the products of American public education.

(Also on FtB)

More like this

A long time ago, I think on Pharyngula, Richard Dawkins said something that really pissed me off. Its been so long ago I cant find the right comment thread anymore, but Dawkins said something regarding epigenetics along the lines of "Um...
My god, epigenetics is a woo-magnet. Its not epigenetics fault, its just science. But the word 'epigenetics' gets put on this ('chambery thing' heh.).
Epigenetics. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
*sigh* My swooning over Venter on the cover of the latest edition of SEED was rudely interrupted by Larry Moran. Evidently he really does get SEED 'for the articles'. heh.