Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Dangers of Overselling Darwin
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sfs" data-source="post: 50833973" data-attributes="member: 8727"><p>Why? You've already posted a summary of his scientific achievements, which have nothing to do with evolution. Why should his comments on evolution carry any more weight than a taxi driver's?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Unlike Skell, I actually study and publish on natural selection and evolution. His article has very little substance, and what there is is often wrong. His comments about studying the development of resistance, for example, display considerable ignorance about how developing resistance is studied by real biologists concerned with that phenomenon. For example, I work with a group studying malaria genetics, and in particular the development of drug resistance in malaria. We pay a great deal of attention to genetic signals that natural selection is occurring, since they can be a powerful clue about where in the genome the necessary mutations are taking place.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sfs, post: 50833973, member: 8727"] Why? You've already posted a summary of his scientific achievements, which have nothing to do with evolution. Why should his comments on evolution carry any more weight than a taxi driver's? Unlike Skell, I actually study and publish on natural selection and evolution. His article has very little substance, and what there is is often wrong. His comments about studying the development of resistance, for example, display considerable ignorance about how developing resistance is studied by real biologists concerned with that phenomenon. For example, I work with a group studying malaria genetics, and in particular the development of drug resistance in malaria. We pay a great deal of attention to genetic signals that natural selection is occurring, since they can be a powerful clue about where in the genome the necessary mutations are taking place. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Dangers of Overselling Darwin
Top
Bottom