Below are some comments I made in reply to someone’s comments on this article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131219093558.htm
The initial comment was that this evidence of Evolution occurring before our very eyes….
Well… not really…. So I asked about the specific genes involved and suggested that this is more than likely evidence of adaptation…. Genes that were already present being revealed… like the darker gypsy moths becoming more prominent in England as coal soot settled on the trees, giving a selective advantage to the darker moths who previously were at a selective disadvantage, but nonetheless already present…. The selective pressure simply flipped…. This is what I said: “Which genes are involved? Are the mutations dominant? And are they lethal this year, with the drop in temperature? Or is this just adaptation… like the darker gypsy moths becoming more prominent as the bark of the trees became darker…? No mutation at all….”
The poster child’s somewhat petulant reply was that adaptation through Natural Selection constitutes Evolution. He appended the original paper. Here it is: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2435.12218/full
Unfortunately, poster boy doesn’t seem to really understand how Science works… or else… HE would have recognized the weaknesses in the paper… and his lame arguments….
So… I replied:
“Ok. I’ll interpret this for you, since you don’t seem to understand how Science works. This is not a randomized, controlled study. The study uses historical controls. That is a significant issue. Many parameters within the study are uncontrolled. In the first sentence of the second paragraph of the introduction, they authors VERY CLEARLY state a bias as their rational for the importance of performing the study. NO ONE can start out with such a glaring bias and end up with an unbiased result! Anyone with ANY reasonable understanding of the Scientific Method understands that. So… the data is that the weights were different…. The EXPLANATION is a very biased myth propagated most likely to obtain funding for further research…. If you ANYTHING about ACADEMIA… you will recognize what I am implying…. Could the explanation be correct? Sure. But the conclusions reached do not present other options…. Leading any rational observer to conclude that only one option was considered…. And THAT injection of bias overwhelms the result of what was already a very weak methodological study to begin with…. Read the Dialogues of Plato so the you can understand how Science is supposed to work. I believe it’s Ion. To reach a valid result, one must consider ALL potential solutions. Starting with one solution… then reaching the conclusion that that one solution is the correct one… lacks true Scientific credibility….
Here is a definition of Evolution from Google… which is a Liberal source: ev·o·lu·tion evəˈlo͞oSHən/ noun
noun: evolution; plural noun: evolutions
1. the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth.
synonyms: Darwinism, natural selection More
“his interest in evolution.
2. the gradual development of something, esp. from a simple to a more complex form.
“the forms of written languages undergo constant evolution”
synonyms: development, advancement, growth, rise, progress, expansion, unfolding; More
Compare and contrast that with the definition of Adaptation, also from Google: ad·ap·ta·tion
noun: adaptation; plural noun: adaptations
1. the action or process of adapting or being adapted.
“the adaptation of teaching strategy to meet students’ needs”
synonyms: alteration, modification, redesign, remodeling, revamping, reworking, reconstruction, conversion More”the adaptation of teaching strategy to meet students’ needs”
Clearly from the above definition Evolution and Adaptation are different. Evolution implies change over time through because of genetics. Adaptation can be evidenced on the spot… which seems to be what is being implied…. Yes, selective pressure is involved, as is Natural Selection, but not necessarily Evolution, because the subset of the species that are being selected may be less well adapted to future changes… like the current global cooling or other changes in the environment that occur simply due to nature.
Adaptation is not synonymous with Evolution and Evolution is not necessarily beneficial… so Evolution is not always adaptation.”
I wish some of these Secular Humanists and Defenders of the Theory of Evolution actually would take time to learn about the Scientific Method and formation of rational arguments…. They act as though they are the hierophants of some new Mystery Cult….