New Findings Confirm Darwin's Theory — Evolution Not Random 386
ScienceDaily is reporting a team of biologists has demonstrated that evolution is a deterministic process, rather than a random selection as some competing theories suggested. "When the researchers measured changes in 40 defined characteristics of the nematodes' sexual organs (including cell division patterns and the formation of specific cells), they found that most were uniform in direction, with the main mechanism for the development favoring a natural selection of successful traits, the researchers said."
Ah, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Ah, but did this deterministic development mechanism evolve deterministically or randomly?
God Recycles (Score:3, Funny)
But... But... (Score:0, Funny)
Repent! Repent!!!
Most interesting (Score:5, Funny)
Finally, there is an answer (Score:3, Funny)
They might even be able to write a mathematical expression for it.
interesting career choice (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ah, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Is the following a fact or faith?
What say ye?Hint: ISATRAP
Re:Ah, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Of course they studied nematodes (Score:3, Funny)
So wait a second... (Score:3, Funny)
Who comes first? (Score:5, Funny)
The chicken leans over to the egg and says; "I guess we answered that question."
Re:Ah, but... (Score:1, Funny)
SIR YES SIR!
You want to make 15th century mathematician Johannes Kepler your bitch DONT YOU!
SIR YES SIR!
Re:Ah, but... (Score:1, Funny)
Two points:
1. While it's good to verify things, you do realize that this proves nothing, right? It is merely in line with the one theory that we have for this sort of thing. It doesn't go anywhere near proving it. To prove that evolutionary selection is deterministic, you'd have to show that it was true for all cases, and that's a bit difficult. What this experiment shows is that for the species tested, traits considered, over the time analyzed, nothing abnormal was observed.
2. There is no "competing theory", just Darwin's. There are those of us that believed that it the selection of traits was deterministic, and then there are
3. While I don't think that this experiment wasn't worth...
WAIT, I'LL COME IN AGAIN
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!
Among our THREE points are:
1. While it's good to verify things, you do realize that this proves nothing, right? It is merely in line with the one theory that we have for this sort of thing. It doesn't go anywhere near proving it. To prove that evolutionary selection is deterministic, you'd have to show that it was true for all cases, and that's a bit difficult. What this experiment shows is that for the species tested, traits considered, over the time analyzed, nothing abnormal was observed.
2. There is no "competing theory", just Darwin's. There are those of us that believed that it the selection of traits was deterministic, and then there are
3. While I don't think that this experiment wasn't worth doing, I don't think it's news. It's like going out to measure the mass of a photon and discovering that it's less than you can measure (yes, I know this has been done; it wasn't very exciting). It doesn't break anything we thought was fine, and doesn't prove anything we didn't already know: it simply puts limits on how wrong our theory can possibly be.
Re:God Recycles (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Ah, but... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:God Recycles (Score:4, Funny)
-- GOD
Re:Ah, but... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ah, but... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ah, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ah, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ah, but... (Score:1, Funny)