
	Where results make sense

Topic: Neodarwinism

	Creation Matters July / August 1999, Volume 4, Number 4
		Neodarwinism is the macroevolutionary view that all life is supposed to have developed by the processes of microevolution.
		Instead, they speak about an ongoing “reproductive struggle.” Neodarwinism was developed in part to blunt the criticisms leveled against Darwinism because of Adolph Hitler’s atrocities, which were committed in the name of survival of the most physically fit.
		Partly, too, neodarwinism was originated to accommodate the burgeoning science of genetics which ran contrary to some of Darwin’s original proposals.
	www.creationresearch.org /creation_matters/99/cm9907.html (6387 words)

	Kevin Kelly -- Chapter 19: Postdarwinism
		Every swirl on a butterfly wing, every curve of leaf, every species of fish is explained by adaptive selection in neodarwinism.
		Therefore, until evolution is duplicated under controlled conditions, in the wild, or in a lab, neodarwinism remains a nice "just-so" story-more like history than science.
		Philosopher of science Karl Popper said bluntly that neodarwinism is not a scientific theory at all, since it cannot be falsified.
	www.kk.org /outofcontrol/ch19-a.html (1614 words)

	Telic Thoughts » A decent, popular article on intelligent design
		Neodarwinism is primarily defended against ID by demonstrating the ID arguments to be based on factual errors, strawman stereotypes of neodarwinism, and errors of reasoning.
		But she argues in that blog that neodarwinism is an evidence free enterprise in which “intuitional mind worship” trumps empericism (attributed unsurprisingly to ID, which even if it is science, has yet to conduct a single experiment) and which as a result has become only “socio-politics”, and attempt to control beliefs by political means.
		What neodarwinism does do is provide a testable theory for the origin of diversity and adaption within life that makes no appeal to teleology as an “efficient cause”.
	telicthoughts.com /?p=201 (10395 words)

	Facts of Life: Shattering the Myths of Darwinism
		NeoDarwinism fails to explain satisfactorily a whole range of extraordinary natural observations -- starting with the thick skin on the soles of our feet, which is a genetic inheritance.
		Fish secrete 'mirror scales' to camouflage themselves against predators, but their skin has to be exactly seven millionths of a centimeter thick or it will not work.
		In recent decades, some Darwinists have resorted to academic censorship, with the result that papers criticising neoDarwinism are not published and the subject is no longer openly debated by press and broadcast media.
	www.sedin.org /propeng/shatter.htm (2971 words)

	Brainstorms: the concept of evolution
		Neodarwinism claims that structure and design is an illusion, but doesn´t that imply, that evolution is an illusion?
		Neodarwinism does not support the idea of evolution, it undermines it.
		Neodarwinism does not just preclude, that evolution has a direction, it precludes the concept of evoloution all together.
	www.iscid.org /boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000293.html (1647 words)

	Darwin-L Message Log 5: 56-70 (January 1994) (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		"Neodarwinism" refers to the general understanding of the evolutionary process that developed first in the period of the "Modern Synthesis" of the 1930s and 1940s.
		"Neodarwinism" is the term that is usually applied to the views of this period: "darwinism" because it represented a revival of natural selection as the principal mechanism of change, and "neo" because it did replace or discard certain elements of Darwin's own views, most notably Darwin's belief in "soft inheritance" (Lamarckian inheritance).
		The claim that neodarwinism has been proven false is somewhat like saying: "Senator X was elected by a majority of the people in his state, but we have proof that Senator X is an embezzeler.
	rjohara.net /darwin/logs/1994/9401-06.html (3592 words)

	ABC Online Forum (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		NeoDarwinism seems to be the law of the day for many which closely follows Martin B's description.
		I have always had the thought that the DNA content relates to NeoDarwinism but the geometry of the DNA strand may be a result of environmental conditions that 'stamp a structure at a point in time' into the strand when the germ cell forms.
		While DNA content and replication errors are a valuable source of variation that assist NeoDarwinism, the structural geometry of the DNA stand certainly has a lot to say about how enzymes and chemical proceses occur.
	www2b.abc.net.au /science/k2/stn/archives/archive71/newposts/870/topic870662.shtm (6027 words)

	The Moral Imperative of Our Future Evolution. Eugenics (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		In a species of animals or plants, those individuals that are more successful at leaving offspring necessarily contribute more copies of their genes to the next generation.
		Neodarwinism assures us that evolution simply does not happen in the time-scale of people.
		According to neodarwinism every organism across the species must produce the number of offspring that exactly matches its fitness.
	home.comcast.net /~neoeugenics/camp.htm (12868 words)

	[No title] (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		NeoDarwinism is supposed to be THE theory of organic evolution, and it advances the idea that natural selection is the major factor in evolution.
		Population genetics is the theoretical background for neoDarwinism, so whatever it establishes is what is at the core of neoDarwinism.
		If it doesn't deal with the generation of novelty, then it would seem that neoDawinism is not a very powerful, or hardly even a useful tool for understanding the evolution of organisms, which we see as the appearance and spread of novel forms, behaviors and ways of life over long periods of time.
	necsi.org:8100 /Lists/complex-science/Message/5668-P.txt (244 words)

	Bacteria mutations
		It is paradoxical to see scientists and engineers emphasising complexity and the need for intelligent design, and at the same time hear theoretical biologists insisting that a combination of random mutations and natural selection is sufficient to explain the origin of mindblowing living systems.
		Despite severe criticisms of the inadequacies of neoDarwinism to explain any changes of importance, these theoretical ideas are still dominant in academic circles.
		Being somewhat dissatisfied with neoDarwinism, some biologists are finding ways of testing the predictions of the theory.
	www.biblicalcreation.org.uk /scientific_issues/bcs017.html (1050 words)

	The Chronicle: Colloquy: Responses
		Neodarwinism predicts that there will be many, many examples of apparent design, or "designoids." These are, as Dawkins puts it, things that appear to have been designed by intelligent agents but really weren't.
		Their research is guided by teleological assumptions, but with the added footnote that it's not that kind of teleology (Thus the word "teleonomy" is coined).
		My point is that ID has the same kind of utility that neodarwinism has; the difference lies in how that utility is accounted for.
	chronicle.com /colloquy/2001/design/422.htm (730 words)

	Darwinism, Neodarwinism, and an Autocatalytic Model of Cultural EvolutionDarwinism, Neodarwinism, and an Autocatalytic ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		Darwinism, and certainly neoDarwinism, grew as a concept of natural selection acting on heritable variations to weed out the less fit, culling for further amplification of the more adapted phenotypes.
		Nowhere in the core of Darwinism, and certainly not in NeoDarwinism, is the issue of how forms happen to come into existence addressed.
		NeoDarwinism arose out of a single central question: Could natural selection, acting on a population of organisms in which two alleles of a single gene afford slight differences in fitness - taken as the propensity to have offspring - actually succeed in substituting a slightly fitter, new allele for the less fit, older allele?
	psycprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk /perl/local/psyc/makedoc?id=657&type=xml (1691 words)

	omniology.com
		"NeoDarwinism is dead," said Eric Davidson, a geneticist and textbook writer at the California Institute of Technology.
		The idea that neoDarwinism is missing something fundamental about evolution is as scandalous to Americans as it is basic to the Chinese.
		According to Chen, the two main forces of evolution espoused by neoDarwinism, natural selection ("survival of the fittest") and random genetic mutation, cannot account for the sudden emergence of so many new genetic forms.
	www.omniology.com /A-LittleFish.html (1566 words)

	Steven stephan steven curtis chapman download ebook hawking steven (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		neoDarwinism says nothing about the disuse of organs and structures having any direct (or indirect) causal relationship with random mutations.
		The notion that disuse causes a heritable reduction in size, complexity or function is Lamarckism not neoDarwinism.
		Structures which may no longer have a function w.r.t to the organism's ability to survive, such as the eyes in subterranean dwellers are indeed affected by random mutations.
	www.nevarts.com /steven (783 words)

	Article in World of Dawkins Web Site
		If they do disappear, it will be because of bad luck, or because of natural selection –; because something about those genes influences the probability that individuals possessing them will survive and reproduce.
		the modern version of Darwinism, often called Neodarwinism, is based upon this insight.
		It was worked out in the 1920s and 1930s by the population geneticists R A Fisher, J B S Haldane and Sewall Wright, and later consolidated into the synthesis of the 1940s known as Neodarwinism.
	www.world-of-dawkins.com /Dawkins/Work/Articles/1998darwinism.shtml (2226 words)

	Coastal Post Online
		This process is not the same as the Darwinian theory constructed to explain it, despite urgings by the National Center for Science Education (the political lobbyists for neoDarwinism in The US).
		Most biologists think an earlier version of it was tested against a theory known as Lamarckism, early in the last century.
		There was then also a mutation theory, a version of which was co-opted into neoDarwinism.
	www.coastalpost.com /04/06/17.htm (1270 words)

	CRS Abstracts, March 2005
		Teeth are one of the most common vertebrate fossils found, partly because they preserve far better than any other body part.
		If any evidence exists for NeoDarwinism, it would most likely be found in fossil teeth.
		The results of a literature research on the origin of teeth show no empirical support for their evolution.
	www.crsq.org /crsq/abstracts/Abstracts42-1.htm (480 words)

	Darwin-L Message Log 5: 79-87 (January 1994) (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		Now that agriculture is known to have developed in several places at different times, and probably through some what different circumstances, it is less common to hear of it described as a "revolution", and in fact it is more often described as a process, and not an event.
		It is primarily oriented towards criticisms of neoDarwinism which come from embryologists and developmental biologists.
		Whoever is to blame, the current state of neoDarwinism 1) doesn't require embryological details for any noticable pressing problems, and 2) has no "gaps" within its theoretical apparatus into which embryology would fit.
	www.rjohara.net /darwin/logs/1994/9401-08.html (3808 words)

	Wilder Smith Book: "The Natural Sciences..."
		It is precisely at this point that Neodarwinism collides head-on with the second law of thermodynamics, which lays down the principle that matter, on its own, does not organize itself to higher order.
		As regards the so-called autoorganization of matter, Neodarwinism is without either a theoretical or an experimental basis.
		As a theoretical concept Neodarwinism proves to be chemically, physiologically, and physically untenable.
	emporium.turnpike.net /C/cs/ns.htm (10755 words)

	PCID - Irreducible Complexity (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		In this book, Behe argues that relatively recent advances in biochemistry reveal the existence of hitherto unknown and unexpected biochemical machines and other complex systems within living organisms which exhibit a property Behe defines as "irreducible complexity".
		To put it another way, if Behe is right, neodarwinism, the currently accepted paradigm of evolutionary theory, will need to be abandoned or at least modified beyond recognition if we wish to provide a truly scientific explanation of these features.
		This in itself would be enough to agitate much of the scientific community, but an even greater source of agitation is that Behe eventually goes on to argue that the only possible explanation of the existence of irreducibly complex biological features of living organisms must be in terms of "intelligent design".
	www.iscid.org /pcid/2004/3/1/griffith_irreducible_complexity.php (157 words)

	Research Good News (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		It was established 50 years ago, during a renaissance of Darwinism, the "neodarwinism synthesis," which resulted in the current paradigm of evolutionary research.
		The Dobzhansky prize is named in honor of Theodosius Dobzhansky, who was largely responsible for the neodarwinism synthesis, and who studied the ecological genetics of fruit flies.
		Pigliucci's research is on the ecological genetics of weedy plants, focusing on the way these organisms can vary in their reaction to environmental conditions (phenotypic plasticity).
	research.utk.edu /ora/rag/goodnews/1997/05-21.html (902 words)

	Evolution and design (1)
		Many scientists have challenged the central role that neodarwinism, or the modern synthetic theory of evolution, assigns to random genetic mutations (mostly involving errors in the replication of DNA).
		She says that 99.9% of random genetic mutations ‘tend to induce sickness, death, or deficiencies’, and challenges people to name a single unambiguous example of the formation of a new species by the slow accumulation of mutations.
		Although Darwin removed this statement from later editions of his book, the substance of its claim remains the central tenet of orthodox neodarwinism – that bears can become whales, or microbes can eventually become elephants by means of random mutation and natural selection.
	ourworld.compuserve.com /homepages/DP5/evod1.htm (8968 words)

	GTCEL - Critical analysis of Lamark, Darwin and Mendel theories of evolution
		On the contrary, they continuously exist and their development in time is the real evolutionary system, as the gene combination is only a method to accelerate genetic development and does not produce any evolution by itself.
		Neodarwinism is the theory based on the development of science and only declares that variations of living beings are produced in their germinal states, when the real problem is when these variations in genetic information are produced and the associated conditions needed to achieve effective development, even after several generations.
		Modern molecular biology is discovering the way in which nature carries out genetic verification and other controls, without knowing the reasons behind them, by studying the behavior of DNA.
	www.molwick.com /gtcel/at0-320-darwiniantheorie.html (787 words)

	Arguments for Design Advance - Does God Exist? - MarApr99
		A number of us who were trained in statistics, made some attempts to approach this somewhat general observation in a quantitative way by looking at the probabilities of other explanations that might be given to explain the complexities of modern discoveries.
		Among the attempts made to deal with this approach, were studies questioning the underlying assumptions of NeoDarwinism, and that drew another group of researchers into the picture.
		Skeptical writers began to attack those who were suggesting that design is the only way to explain the complexities of life with Richard Dawkins perhaps being the most vocal of these writers.
	www.doesgodexist.org /MarApr99/ArgumentsForDesignAdvance.html (1200 words)

	Salthe: Analysis and critique of the concept of Natural Selection (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-16)
		The randomness in neoDarwinism has been read into the mutation process, which seems eminently plausible given the DNA model of genes -- and this continues to be appropriate even after it had been shown that some combinations of DNA bases are less stable than others.
		Further applications of randomness to the Synthetic Theory of evolution (neoDarwinism extending its conceptual reach into morphology, ontogeny, paleontology and ecology) include genetic drift, preadaptation (prospective adaptation), and environmental change itself.
		It is perhaps worth mentioning that the core of neoDarwinism, population genetics theory, is fundamentally mathematical.
	www.nbi.dk /%7Enatphil/salthe/anacri.99.08.html (7248 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)