Dr. Schwartz' "MIssing Links"

Well, if you'd read the press release from Pitt, you'd know that the article pretty accurately states the Professor's ideas. Press ReleaseIt looks at first blush like he's proposing something akin to PE, but believes that changes are even more abrupt than Gould theorized.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

As my semi-literate 16 y.o. son would say, "U right." Here is the article that the press release is about.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

Well, the second link that RADZ has in message 15 is a list of publications for Jeffery H. Schwartz, University of Pittsburgh. No mention is made of the article from World magazine. The most likely explanation, I think, is that the World article was by a different Jeffery Schwartz. This seems particularly likely given the number of seemingly legitimate articles that Jeffery H. Schwartz has had published in peer review publications.Either that or he wrote the World article during some fit of insanity and is now disavowing all connection to is.I must admit, though, it does seem odd that the press release article speaks of "debunking" a supposed Darwinian myth. As several have already pointed out, there is nothing implicit in Darwinism that requires that change be constant or gradual. Moreover, I always get a funny feeling in the back of my mind whenever sanyone talks about "debunking" anything relating to Darwinism. "Debunking" just doesn't seem like a word that is often used in describing peer reviewed articles.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

I am way out of my field here, and only partially understand the conversation, so what I'm about to ask may be gibberish. If so, don't be afraid to tell me.Is he saying that the changes "store up" but are not expressed until something happens when the "heat shock proteins" are "overwhelmed?"

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

Well, as I said, way out of my field, and I haven't read the paper, so about all I can do is try to discuss the language, without regard to the science behind it.On the one hand, he could be saying that the "heat shock proteins" keep the mutations from happening at all, until the stressor, and then all hell breaks loose. Or, it could be that the mutations are continuing all the time, but not expressing until the stressor. In either case, the outward appearance of the organism will not change until the stressor, but in the latter, the genetic make up of the organism will constantly be changing, whereas in the former, the genetic make up is unchanged until the stressor.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat