Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 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: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Stumpers for PZ Myers
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 3 of 36 (618531)
06-03-2011 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Percy
06-02-2011 8:48 PM


quote:
3) Could you please explain the sheer lack of congruence between anatomical homology and developmental pathways / precursors? Since such congruence is a prediction of neo-Darwinism,why isn’t it observed? Moreover, not only are there different embryological (i.e. non-homologous) processes and different genetic mechanisms to apparently homologous organs. But there is also the conundrum of homologous genetic mechanisms for analogous (i.e. non-homologous) organs. And then there is also the problem of homologous structures arising from different embryological sources, utterly undermining the evolutionary explanation. Isn’t the most straightforward reading of these facts that the adult organs have not been derived from a common ancestor? Why is it that you are happy to use those instances where embryological development and adult similarities are consistent as evidence of common descent, but set aside those instances where they are not consistent?
I would be very surprised if this question (for example) was asked during a verbal debate.
Unless you were at a biology conference, I doubt that 90% of people could understand the question - and I would expect the 90% wouldn't understand the answer either.
What I would be wary of is if they translate the answer question into layman's terms.
Unless you can reply in similar terms, then the audience will only 'understand' the question and not understand the answer.
This could then mean that Myers loses 'by default'.
Will his audience really be that educated in biology?
(I know that I am having trouble understanding some of the questions - and they are written down. If they were read out to me, I would probably need them repeated.)
Edited by Panda, : wrong word
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Percy, posted 06-02-2011 8:48 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Mazzy, posted 06-13-2011 2:46 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 8 of 36 (618603)
06-04-2011 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Bolder-dash
06-04-2011 7:20 AM


{removed by Panda}
Edited by Panda, : Decided to play nice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Bolder-dash, posted 06-04-2011 7:20 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 27 of 36 (620481)
06-17-2011 5:19 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Mazzy
06-13-2011 2:46 PM


Mazzy writes:
*irrelevant blathering*
Nice job at not reading my post.
Oh - but you have a history of not reading what you are quoting, don't you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Mazzy, posted 06-13-2011 2:46 PM Mazzy 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