tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post8713856196456856587..comments2024-02-10T20:36:43.004+11:00Comments on Duae Quartunciae: Teach the controversysylashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10594421176931832170noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-39485260572999180702022-08-17T18:22:30.975+10:002022-08-17T18:22:30.975+10:00Thanks for this blog posttThanks for this blog posttFort Lauderdale Movershttps://www.find-local-movers.com/us/florida-moving-companies/fort-lauderdale-movers.shtmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-83805759115723785162007-05-15T00:29:00.000+10:002007-05-15T00:29:00.000+10:00I'm not a biologist. If you can educate me further...<I>I'm not a biologist. If you can educate me further in any of these or add some more, please leave me a comment!</I><BR/><BR/>I am a biologist (at least under my own working definition), and this is the best summary of real controversies within evolutionary biology that I've seen. This is cool, I'll definately be visiting here again.<BR/><BR/><I><B>2. Horizontal transfer verses variation through descent.</B> <BR/>I think this could only be done at an advanced level: I think the problem is that it is rare in eukaryotes, so you would have to make sure the students understood the differences between prokaryotes and eukaryotes in terms of their genetics and ecology.</I><BR/><BR/>While I agree that students of this topic would need some decent background in cellular anatomy, top-level taxonomy, and molecular genetics, as well as a smattering of cellular physiology and basic evolutionary theory (especially population genetics), that doesn't to me imply necessarily "an advanced level". I can (optimistically) imagine a second-year university course that would cover horizontal transfer in about a week or two, focusing on the evolutionary effects more than on the mechanisms. That could be very interesting.TheBrummellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08973380652057861796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-61562093663260350212007-05-13T19:38:00.000+10:002007-05-13T19:38:00.000+10:00Bob -- thanks for the comments. Your comment on ev...Bob -- thanks for the comments. Your comment on evolution and behavior was one that stuck out to me. You're quite right; this needs to be handled well if it is mentioned in schools. It's also probably an important one precisely because it is open to abuse!<BR/><BR/>And congratulations; you've been singled out for mention in a recent post by Afarensis: <A HREF="http://scienceblogs.com/afarensis/2007/05/12/pav_and_frequency_dependence_o/" REL="nofollow">Pav and Frequency Dependence: Once Again D Fails to Understand the Issues</A>. Good work! I am honoured to have to drop by here as well. Kiitos.sylashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10594421176931832170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879226427561095229.post-36393486306903312782007-05-13T17:46:00.000+10:002007-05-13T17:46:00.000+10:00A few comments -1. The Cambrian Explosion. But not...A few comments -<BR/><B>1. The Cambrian Explosion.</B> <BR/>But not on this - outside my area!<BR/><BR/><B>2. Horizontal transfer verses variation through descent.</B> <BR/>I think this could only be done at an advanced level: I think the problem is that it is rare in eukaryotes, so you would have to make sure the students understood the differences between prokaryotes and eukaryotes in terms of their genetics and ecology.<BR/><BR/><B>3. Particulars of lineage and relationships. </B><BR/>I think this would be a great idea! It would show where there is lack of knowledge, and could be used to motivate the understanding of the techniques (morphological comparison, paleontology, molecular evolution etc.). The only problem is that the moment an example is written up in a textbook, someone will solve it.<BR/><BR/><B>4. Drift verses positive selection.</B><BR/>Another good idea! We don't have a good idea about the relative importance over a short time scale: this is actually something that's related to a lot of my research.<BR/><BR/><B>5. Target of selection. </B><BR/>I think this has more or less been solved, in the sense that we now understand the difference between levels of selection and levels of heredity, and that they need not be the same.<BR/><BR/>The problem is one of deciding how important different levels are, and without a systematic survey of nature this is difficult. Because of this, the debates now seem to be producing more heat than light.<BR/><BR/>There's a book called Levels of Selection where, in the introduction, the authors get marvellously grumpy about the debates, and end up saying (in effect) "just shut up about them, and look at the interesting stuff. Like the rest of this book".<BR/><BR/><B>6. Evolution and behaviour.</B> <BR/>Yes, also a good idea, although it might be difficult to teach it without getting into political controversies.<BR/><BR/><B>7. Physical details of microevolution. </B><BR/>I think this is an area where we're starting to get a good handle on what's going on, but we might need a few years to consolidate our knowledge. So, I'm not sure it's a controversy as such: there are debates, but that's just part of the process. Mind you, I think it would be great to teach some of this.<BR/><BR/>There. That's my kaksi pennia.<BR/><BR/>BobAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com