Carl Zimmer in National Geographic

National Geographic has an article written by Carl Zimmer. Nice article; it describes current investigations into the evolution of seemingly complex organs from simpler predecessors. In particular, Zimmer describes how similar genes to those responsible for the complex organs or body plans in "advanced" species are found in closely related, simpler species doing a different (although usually similar) job.Nice article.Edited by Admin, : Attempt to workaround a bug by removing HTML from the title.

Well, I quickly opened up the link and started to read...But by the time I got to :

quote:

---

The vast majority of biologists do not share this belief. Studying how complex structures came to be is one of the most exciting frontiers in evolutionary biology, with clues coming at remarkable speed.

---

having noticed Zimmer's association of bacteria and eyes, I KNOW, he has managed to cloud, between Gould's use of bricks and collumns, GOULD'S OWN invocation of anti-creationism.It is possible that Carl makes up for it in the rest of the article. Knowing Carl's writing style somewhat I will doubt in my first stab here&now that he does. I will read it all and report back.What needs to be better popularized than simple comparisions of creation and evolution is the older notion of a few genes controlling an organ towardst the post-modern slant of a gaggle of them being co-ordinated. Outside of places specifically dedicated to the debate difference, such as EVC, mixing creation and evolution in an article is dangerous as the readers in general do not have senstive evctriggersubjectivites to help them out.Again I will give Carl Zimmer the benefit of the doubt, but what the people need are clear differences of opinions on genetics more than attempts to historically relegate some opinions to "the bad old days of creationsim" as this article below seems to do. So far Carl did not even do that with respect to S.J. Gould's chapter on evo-devo in his Structure of Evolutionary Theory book despite the truth and fact that Gould was willing and wrote an introduction to Zimmer's PBS book "EVOLUTION" with "eyes" all over the cover. One might say, "Well, National Geographic is a non-technical mag" but again I would keep the creationism out of it, the geography speaks for far more of it than we can commuinicate genetically even if this is inverted in reality and one would like to say more. Instead, Carl could have written on the same topic by dividing the communication into perspectives from Lamarck, Geofrroy and Darwin + Modern Synthesis& beyond touching back to his point about "scientists", at least that, is how I would approach it.