Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Cases Troublesome for Scientists
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 6 of 30 (551018)
03-20-2010 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by InGodITrust
03-19-2010 6:26 PM


What cases in nature are the most troublesome for scientists to reconcile with the theory of evolution by natural selection? Are there any at all? Or are they so numerous that a top-10 list would be in order to get started?
It seems to me that the case of ornaments for sexual selection is troublesome, because I found two competing explanations: one is Fisher's runaway explanation, and the other says an ornament advertises fittness and good genes because its owner is able to survive despite being handicaped by it. But maybe scientists do not consider ornaments troublesome, and it is only what scientists find troublesome that I'm asking about.
I think your example beautifully demonstrates the disconnect between your standpoint and that of a scientist. They are many questions in Evolutionary theory which are either unanswered, or where the potential answers have not been satisfactorily resolved one way or the other. You've given one example, I can throw in some more - the nature of pre-cambian evolution, why and how humans developed such remarkable brains, and naked skins, what patterns of rate change typify evolution, how much do random events influence the large scale pattern of evolution, etc.
However, no scientist is going to consider these "troublesome to reconcile with the theory of evolution" (although some might quibble with the 'by natural selection' bit) because they're unanswered questions within the settled question of whether things evolve at all. To give an analogy, historians of the second world war will argue vociferously over how important this battle or that battle was, how much technology played a role, exactly how many Jews died in the camps etc., etc. but no serious 2nd world war historian is going to deny that there was a second world war, or that Britain, Russia and the US where on the same side fighting the Germans or that vast numbers of Jews (and Gypsies and homosexuals) were killed by the Germans in concentration camps, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by InGodITrust, posted 03-19-2010 6:26 PM InGodITrust has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


(1)
Message 10 of 30 (551185)
03-21-2010 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by InGodITrust
03-21-2010 3:35 PM


Mr Jack, your reply, "some may quibble with the 'by natural selection' bit" tells me there are cases of evolution for which at least a percentage of scientists struggle to see how natural selection is responsible.
That's not quite what I said.
This is interesting to me, because I had thought that scientists attributed all evolution to natural selection, aside from the chance asteroid wiping perfectly good species. But in the aftermath of the asteroid, or other upheaval, don't scientists believe that natural selection guides all evolution of the survivors?
The consensus view is that natural selection is the primary factor in evolution, and certainly the only one that is actually capable of producing meaningful adaption, however there is disagreement over the extent to which non-selective forces are important in determing the path of evolution. I think all evolutionary scientists accept that there are non-adaptive features of evolution (from genetic drift to pleiotropy) but there is disagreement as to their influence.
But, again, these are disagreements about the details not the overall picture.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by InGodITrust, posted 03-21-2010 3:35 PM InGodITrust has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by InGodITrust, posted 03-21-2010 6:11 PM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024