Podcasts about dobzhansky

Evolution is sometimes described -- not precisely, but with some justification -- as being about the "survival of the fittest." But that idea doesn't work unless there is some way for one generation to pass down information about how best to survive. We now know that such information is passed down in a variety of ways: through our inherited genome, through epigenetic factors, and of course through cultural transmission. Chris Adami suggests that we update Dobzhansky's maxim "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution" to "... except in the light of information." We talk about information theory as a subject in its own right, and how it helps us to understand organisms, evolution, and the origin of life.Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/02/19/266-christoph-adami-on-how-information-makes-sense-of-biology/Support Mindscape on Patreon.Christoph Adami received his Ph.D. in physics from Stony Brook University. He is currently professor of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics as well as Physics and Astronomy at Michigan State University. Among his awards are the NASA Exceptional Achievement Medal and the Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Society for Artificial Life. His new book is The Evolution of Biological Information: How Evolution Creates Complexity, from Viruses to Brains.Web siteMichigan State web pageGoogle Scholar publicationsWikipediaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A tremendous discussion with defense lawyer and ABT Narrative Gym book coauthor Doug Passon plus his trial lawyering collaborator Patrick Barone, Esq. about their use of “Psychodrama” in preparation for defending their clients.  It's a great discussion of how they are both using the ABT and Dobzhansky, as well as Doug's ABT analysis of the iconic Miranda Rights pointing out the (quite possibly intentional) lack of narrative strength in the statement. Randy Olsonhttps://twitter.com/ABTagenda​ Randy's Blog: http://scienceneedsstory.com Learn more about the ABT Framework Course: http://www.abtframework.com/ Doug Passon https://www.dougpassonlaw.com/ https://twitter.com/dougpassonlaw Set For Sentencing Podcast:  https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/set-for-sentencing/id1622272089 Patrick Barone https://www.baronedefensefirm.com https://www.michiganpsychodramacenter.com/

*Humiliation 101: Listen as Fred Williams and Doug McBurney discuss Real Science, on Friday! This week they analyze and refute the nonsense passed off as science by Ira Flatow over at NPR, (starting with analysis of Ira's Marxist oratory formulae, and the professor he humiliates). *Test for Echo: The NPR host says that of course evolution is just "how scientists understand biology"! But there are plenty of doubting scientists who believe evolution is at best unworkable, at middling ridiculous, and at worst evil! *March Madness: Hear the evolutionists lament the fact that some of the early imagery designed by evolutionists to fool children about origins "did more harm than good" for their cause (because many early proponents of Darwinism did not understand it would eventually involve the overthrow of all reason). We remind them that images like the "March of Progress" were also fake, phony and full of lies! *Stealing the Devil His Due: Asked for his best evidence "that evolution is real'', Prosanta Chakrabarty, Ph.D. misappropriates the name of God's Tree of Life, makes false claims about the evolutionist's "Tree of whatever", and ignores, or misrepresents the mountain of anti-evolution evidence accumulating in the Real Science world of genetics! *Everything Makes Nonsense: Flatow dusts off Dobzhansky's old saw that "nothing in biology makes sense without evolution." But that was proven false at least a decade ago by The Late Great Bob Enyart himself! *The Evolution of "Evilution": Is it just me or does Ira slip into the "Richard Dawkins" pronunciation of "Evilution" every once in a while? Regardless! His assertion regarding "neutral" evolution doesn't hold up according to his otherwise fellow travelers over at Quanta Magazine, and is being absolutely dunked on by Real Science researchers and their studies of cave fish adaptation at ICR. Trading Biology for Non-Binary: The only thing more pitiful than listening to an NPR host trying to align science, gender ideology and creepy weird sex stuff, is hearing a full professor, (and father of two girls) go along with it. Please just let the humiliation end!

*Humiliation 101: Listen as Fred Williams and Doug McBurney discuss Real Science, on Friday! This week they analyze and refute the nonsense passed off as science by Ira Flatow over at NPR, (starting with analysis of Ira's Marxist oratory formulae, and the professor he humiliates). *Test for Echo: The NPR host says that of course evolution is just "how scientists understand biology"! But there are plenty of doubting scientists who believe evolution is at best unworkable, at middling ridiculous, and at worst evil! *March Madness: Hear the evolutionists lament the fact that some of the early imagery designed by evolutionists to fool children about origins "did more harm than good" for their cause (because many early proponents of Darwinism did not understand it would eventually involve the overthrow of all reason). We remind them that images like the "March of Progress" were also fake, phony and full of lies! *Stealing the Devil His Due: Asked for his best evidence "that evolution is real'', Prosanta Chakrabarty, Ph.D. misappropriates the name of God's Tree of Life, makes false claims about the evolutionist's "Tree of whatever", and ignores, or misrepresents the mountain of anti-evolution evidence accumulating in the Real Science world of genetics! *Everything Makes Nonsense: Flatow dusts off Dobzhansky's old saw that "nothing in biology makes sense without evolution." But that was proven false at least a decade ago by The Late Great Bob Enyart himself! *The Evolution of "Evilution": Is it just me or does Ira slip into the "Richard Dawkins" pronunciation of "Evilution" every once in a while? Regardless! His assertion regarding "neutral" evolution doesn't hold up according to his otherwise fellow travelers over at Quanta Magazine, and is being absolutely dunked on by Real Science researchers and their studies of cave fish adaptation at ICR. Trading Biology for Non-Binary: The only thing more pitiful than listening to an NPR host trying to align science, gender ideology and creepy weird sex stuff, is hearing a full professor, (and father of two girls) go along with it. Please just let the humiliation end!

Virginie Courtier-OrgogozoBiodiversité et écosystèmes (2022-2023)Collège de FranceColloque - Integrating Evolutionary Genetics and Ecology : An Ancestral Balanced Inversion Polymorphism Confers Global AdaptationSince the pioneering work of Dobzhansky in the 1940s, many chromosomal inversions have been identified but how they contribute to adaptation remains poorly understood. In Drosophila melanogaster, the widespread inversion polymorphism In(3R)P is involved in climate adaptation, exhibiting non-neutral latitudinal clines on multiple continents. Here, I summarize new results suggesting that this chromosomal rearrangement represents a long-term (equilibrium) balanced polymorphism of ancestral African origin and that it harbors alleles that are maintained by balancing selection on several continents. Our findings indicate that In(3R)P spread out of its ancestral subtropical/tropical range and then become latitudinally along similar but independent climatic gradients, always being frequent in subtropical/tropical areas but rare or absent in temperate climates.Thomas Flatt is Full Professor of Evolutionary Biology and Head of the Department of Biology at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Thomas' research interests are the genomic basis of adaptation, population genetics, and the evolution life histories and aging, mainly using Drosophila as a model system. He received his M.Sc. from the University of Basel in 1999 (supervisor: Prof. Stephen Stearns), for work done at the University of Sydney with Prof. Richard Shine, and his Ph.D. from Fribourg in 2004 (supervisor: Prof. Tadeusz Kawecki). Between 2004 and 2008, he was a postdoctoral researcher at Brown University with Prof. Marc Tatar and a visiting postdoc with Prof. Neal Silverman at UMass Medical School, funded by fellowships from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) and the Roche Research Foundation. Prior to taking up his position in Fribourg in 2017, he was a SNSF Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution at Lausanne (2012-17), a Fellow at the Wissenschaftskolleg Berlin (2012), a faculty member of the Vienna Graduate School of Population Genetics and a tenured group leader at the Institute of Population Genetics in Vienna (2009-12). Between 2018 and 2021 he held a DFG Mercator Fellowship and Visiting Professorship at the University of Münster. He has been serving on numerous editorial, advisory and reviewing panels and, with Josefa Gonzalez (Barcelona), co-leads an international consortium of researchers, the European Drosophila Population Genomics Consortium (DrosEU). He currently serves as an elected member of the National Research Council, the scientific body of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF).

Os estudos ecológicos nos fornecem informações para entender melhor o mundo ao nosso redor, o que pode nos ajudar a melhorar o meio ambiente, gerenciar os recursos naturais e proteger a saúde humana. Separe meia horinha do seu dia e descubra com a Dra. Mila Massuda (@milamassuda) do BlaBlaLogia (@blablalogia) como foi o surgimento da Ecologia. Apresentação: Mila Massuda (@milamassuda) Roteiro: Mila Massuda (@milamassuda) e Emilio Garcia (@emilioblablalogia) Edição: @Matheus_Heredia (@mewmediaLAB) Produção Prof. Vítor Soares (@profvitorsoares) e BláBláLogia (@blablalogia) REFERÊNCIAS: BEGON, Michael; TOWNSEND, Colin R. Ecology: from individuals to ecosystems. John Wiley & Sons, 2021. BUFFON, George Louis Leclerc; DAUBENTON, Louis Jean Marie. Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière, avec la description du Cabinet du Roi. chez JH Schneider, 1766. CANTINO, Philip D. et al. (Ed.). PhyloCode: a phylogenetic code of biological nomenclature. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2020. DARWIN, Charles. A origem das espécies. 2009. DE QUEIROZ, Kevin; CANTINO, Philip D.; GAUTHIER, Jacques A. (Ed.). Phylonyms: a Companion to the PhyloCode. CRC Press, 2020. DOBZHANSKY, Th et al. Evolution WH Freeman and Company. San Francisco, 1977. DOBZHANSKY, Theodosius. Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. The american biology teacher, v. 75, n. 2, p. 87-91, 2013. EISNER, Thomas. For love of insects. Harvard University Press, 2005. ELTON, Charles S. Animal ecology. University of Chicago Press, 2001. FORBES, Stephen A. The lake as a microcosm. 1887. HAECKEL, Ernst. Generelle morphologie der organismen. Georg Reimer, 1866. KALM, Peter. 1771. Travels into North America: containing its natural history (...). Translated by JR Forster. Warrington: printed by William Eyres, 1770. KREBS, Charles J. The experimental analysis of distribution and abundance. Ecology. New York: Harper and Row, p. 1-14, 1972. LACK, David et al. The natural regulation of animal numbers. The Natural Regulation of Animal Numbers., 1954. MACARTHUR, Robert H. On the relative abundance of bird species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 43, n. 3, p. 293-295, 1957. MACARTHUR, Robert H.; MACARTHUR, John W. On bird species diversity. Ecology, v. 42, n. 3, p. 594-598, 1961. MACARTHUR, Robert H.; WILSON, Edward O. The theory of island biogeography. Princeton university press, 2001. MAYR, Ernst. The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Harvard University Press, 1982. MICHAUX, André. Flora boreali-americana. apud fratres Levrault, 1803. RAVEN, Charles E. John Ray: naturalist: his life and works. Cambridge University Press, 1986. RAY, J.; WILLUGHBY, F. The ornithology of Francis Willughby of Middleton. A.C. for John Martyn, 1678. RAY, John. Catalogus Plantarum Angliae. Martyn. 1670. RIBATTI, D. William Harvey and the discovery of the circulation of the blood. Vasc Cell 1, 3 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1186/2040-2384-1-3 SIMPSON, George Gaylord. Mammals and the nature of continents. American Journal of Science, v. 241, n. 1, p. 1-31, 1943. WARMING, Eugenius et al. Oecology of plants; an introduction to the study of plant-communities. 1909.

Lawyers are fundamentally problem solvers; and narrative is, as Dr. Randy Olson tells us, is “a series of events that occur in search of a solution to a problem.” So, if you want to persuade decision makers to reach the right result at sentencing, you must communicate in narrative. Helping us get set for sentencing this week is communications expert, author, filmmaker, and teacher Dr. Randy Olson.   Dr. Olson has cracked the code of narrative structure.  He has taken the myriad complex and often inaccessible story models developed over centuries, and boiled them down to the elegantly simple, immediately actionable, format of  “AND, BUT, & THEREFORE”.  These three magic words embody the indispensible pillars of all great communication:  agreement, contradiction & consequence.  Randy has authored several books on narrative communication, including the legal edition of his "Narrative Gym" series, of which I am a co-author. This episode marks our first deep dive into the world of narrative, and I'm so excited to start this conversation with you! IN THIS EPISODE: Lawyers are problem solvers, narrative is problem solving; Why we must embrace, not fear, the word “story” at sentencing; How to craft a compelling narrative guaranteed to engage a listener and compel them to action; Brain science behind narrative communication; The difference between “story” & “narrative”; The “rule of replacing” – a simple technique that can help transform boring and confusing written communication into something clear and persuasive; The "Dobzhansky" template & the power of finding ONE narrative thread to tie your presentation together; Dobzhansky at work in the OJ Simpson case; The magic of “arouse and fulfill” in persuasive advocacy; The need to heed “Shirley's Law”, and take control over your sentencing story; Analysis of MLK's “I have a dream” speech as an example of a perfect “ABT” narrative construction. LINKS: The Narrative Gym For Law: Introducing the ABT Framework for Persuasive Advocacy (Amazon) www.abtframework.com  

Laura Pavlakovich didn't even need to hear the end of the Dobzhansky template before she blurted, “Oh, I know my one word — it's COMMUNITY.” Buried in the middle of this excellent episode is a wonderful (and pure ABT structured!) story Laura tells about meeting the mother of a Type One child. This interview shows how much good the ABT Framework can do in the non-profit sector. Laura Pavlakovich https://www.yourejustmytype.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/yourejustmytype1/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/yourejustmytype1 New York Times: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLwDvK0j4DQ NBC News: https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/growing-concern-about-the-soaring-cost-of-insulin-1430192195997 Shoutout LA Article: https://shoutoutla.com/meet-laura-pavlakovich-photographer-non-profit-founder/ Randy Olson https://twitter.com/ABTagenda​ Randy's Blog: http://scienceneedsstory.com Learn more about the ABT Framework Course: http://www.abtframework.com/

In 1973 the eminent evolutionary geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote an essay  entitled “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution.” Presumably, that would include molecular biology, and as Dobzhanksy was writing, the field of molecular evolution was bearing fruit that would revolutionize our understanding of Darwinian evolutionary biology. Or, perhaps more precisely, it would extend and move beyond a purely Darwinian understanding of changes in the DNA sequence on the molecular level. In the 1970's, the idea that evolution at the scale of DNA and proteins was “neutral” in relation to adaptive fitness came to the fore through the work of both population geneticists and molecular biologists. This is in contrast to the emphasis placed on natural selection and adaptation in Darwin's original theory, and pushed forward by Dobzhansky and his colleagues in the mid-20th century with the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis. Today on the Unsupervised Learning podcast Razib talks to Alex Palazzo, a molecular biologist who has also thought deeply about the relationship between his field and evolution, and where we are 40 years after the neutralist revolution. The conversation covers the issues brought up in Palazzo's paper Non-Darwinian Molecular Biology. Was Charles Darwin wrong? Well, his ideas and theory were clearly incomplete in various ways. Palazzo argues for the importance of the mechanistic and structural details of genes and DNA that go into explaining why evolution produces the diverse traits and characteristics we see all around us. He also discusses why complex lifeforms exist due to the built-in tolerance of sloppiness in DNA replication, and addresses questions such as why genomes vary in size so greatly (did you know that the wheat genome is forty times larger than the rice genome?).

Fire ecology experts Dr. Christy Brigham (National Park Service, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks) and Dr. Euan Ritchie (Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Deakin University) join hosts Jen Martin and Randy Olson in an ABT-structured discussion of the issue of wildfire (California) and bushfire (Australia). Here's a teaser: their Dobzhansky term is “Misguided Confidence." Randy Olson on the Web: https://twitter.com/ABTagenda​ Randy's Blog: http://scienceneedsstory.com​ Learn more about the ABT Framework Course: http://storycirclestraining.com/ Jen Martin: https://twitter.com/scidocmartin https://www.instagram.com/scidocmartin/ Science Communication at the University of Melbourne: https://blogs.unimelb.edu.au/science-communication/ Jen's Blog: https://espressoscience.com/

Randy Olson and newly appointed Australian Correspondent Jen Martin discuss the idea of “Dobzhansky Checking,” have fun with stories about Richard Dawkins, and examine a science communication study that “isn't even wrong.” Episode References AAAS Video: ABT Framework/Story Circles: https://youtu.be/ungl-jozHLA The Narrative Blitz Event sign up: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/the-narrative-blitz-redux-tickets-151542249949 Assessment by Audiences Shows Little Effect of Science Communication Training: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1075547020971639 On the Web Follow Randy on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ABTagenda​ Read Randy's Blog: http://scienceneedsstory.com​ Learn more about the ABT Framework Course: http://storycirclestraining.com/  

From the BEL archieves, * Real Science Radio has a Far Ranging Conversation with Krauss: Co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams present Bob's interview of theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical), atheist Lawrence Krauss. Fred says, "It's David vs. Goliath, but without the slingshot." As the discussion ranges from astronomy and anatomy to cosmology and physics, most folks would presume that Dr. Krauss would take apart Enyart's arguments, especially when the Bible believer got the wrong value for the electron-to-proton mass ratio. But the conversation reveals fascinating dynamics from the creation/evolution debate. (The planned 25-minute interview ran 40 minutes, so there's also a Krauss Part II and once in each half we say, "Stop the tape, stop the tape," to comment.) * "All Evidence Overwhelmingly Supports the Big Bang": Contradicting Dr. Krauss'

From the BEL archieves, * Real Science Radio has a Far Ranging Conversation with Krauss: Co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams present Bob's interview of theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical), atheist Lawrence Krauss. Fred says, "It's David vs. Goliath, but without the slingshot." As the discussion ranges from astronomy and anatomy to cosmology and physics, most folks would presume that Dr. Krauss would take apart Enyart's arguments, especially when the Bible believer got the wrong value for the electron-to-proton mass ratio. But the conversation reveals fascinating dynamics from the creation/evolution debate. (The planned 25-minute interview ran 40 minutes, so there's also a Krauss Part II and once in each half we say, "Stop the tape, stop the tape," to comment.) * "All Evidence Overwhelmingly Supports the Big Bang": Contradicting Dr. Krauss'

* Jaw-dropping, head-banging, socks blown off, eye-popping, baffled, shocked & stunned: Really. :) Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams have fun providing so many examples of evolutionists (chemical, stellar, biological) being jaw-dropping surprised, shocked, even stunned and horrified, when their huge discoveries contradict some of the most fundamental predictions of their materialist theories. * Head-banging: As reported by LiveScience, cutting-edge researchers running a major National Science Foundation evolution experiment admitted that, "If Darwin was right", they would have documented the evidence for his claimed insight on competition and the (supposed) tree of life. Instead, their results falsified Darwin's claim. Of the 60 species of algae being studied for a five year period, Charles Darwin predicted how well and how poorly such organisms would compete for resources, based on their respective distances from each other on the (supposed) tree of life. But of the outcome, "It was completely unexpected. We sat there banging our heads against the wall. Darwin's hypothesis has been with us for so long, how can it not be right? ... We should be able to look at the [supposed] Tree of Life, and evolution should make it clear who will win in competition and who will lose. But the traits that regulate competition can't be predicted from the Tree of Life." For more, see LiveScience and rsr.org/darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life. * 2015 Update: One of many discoveries that could be added to this list of shocked evolutionists is the black hole, at 12.8 billion light-years away, the mass of 12 billion Suns that "simply can't exist" by the big bang theory, but it does. * 2019 Update: Moon may be tectonically active, geologists shaken, is the headline in National Geographic. "A new look at Apollo-era seismic data revealed that the moon's insides might be warmer than scientists thought possible." See this also at rsr.org/tess#moon in our classic List of the Transient Events of the Solar System! * Stunned without the Foggiest Notion: So "astounding" are the "similarities" of Hox developmental regulatory genes across the animal kingdom that prominent evolutionist Sean Carroll wrote that, “no biologist had even the foggiest notion that such similarities could exist between genes of such different animals.” Because little in biology makes sense in the light of evolution, a world full of neo-Darwinist scientists never predicted this astounding consistency because, by their belief system, "The evolutionary lines that led to flies and mice diverged more than 500 million years ago..." So, this world famous biologist admits that, "Such sequence similarity was just stunning." Of course this falsified one of the most fundamental predictions of neo-Darwinism. [This item is a post-show update.] * Horrendous: Dr. David Page of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., said in the journal Nature that the human and chimp Y chromosomes are "horrendously different from each other." Horrendously? Is that a scientific term? Why not just, "different?" Is Saturn horrendously different from Mars? Why horrendously so? Because for modern Darwinism to not lose face, chimps have to be shown to be our closest relatives. Yet 15% of the gorilla genome is closer to us, and the chimp's Y chromosome (that which makes us males... well, males...) is so massively different that we have yet more evidence on its face that the human genome is not 98.5% identical to the chim. For more, see rsr.rog/list-of-genomes-that-just-dont-fit. * Jaw-dropping: National Geographic quotes NASA's Messenger team member David Blewett saying, as RSR documents evolutionary scientists saying all the time regarding major observations that contradict predictions based on their most fundamental claims, "this jaw-dropping thing that nobody ever predicted," that Mercury has actively forming surface features, something judged impossible for a tiny, four-billion year old inert rock. :) * Socks Blown Off: Close-up photos showed the youthful appearance of Pluto as did the images of its largest moon: "We originally thought Charon would be an ancient terrain covered in craters," said New Horizons team member Cathy Olkin. "So when we saw the pictures this morning, it just blew our socks off." And panning upward from their feet, Discover Magazine reports on NASA's Pluto team including principal investigator Alan Stern's eyes popping out of his head. * Baffled by Asteroids that Look Like Comets: See phys.org, NASA, EarthSky, and AmazingSpace. * And the Beat Goes On: For more fun examples, just listen to today's program! And as an honorable mention, consider the response of the scientists who found the presence of modern bacteria, etc., in these allegedly 220 Mya microbes. (Nat'l Geographic removed that page from the web but we put it back up!) And likewise when others described 42 "oddball" blue stars in the Milky Way! * More Baffling Still: After 150 years of searching, evolutionists have found the best evidence ever discovered for Darwinism, caught on tape no less... Today's Resource: Please check out our newest science resource... The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set or HD Download Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory. DVD Vol. 1 1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture 2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence DVD Vol. 2 3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing!

* Jaw-dropping, head-banging, socks blown off, eye-popping, baffled, shocked & stunned: Really. :) Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams have fun providing so many examples of evolutionists (chemical, stellar, biological) being jaw-dropping surprised, shocked, even stunned and horrified, when their huge discoveries contradict some of the most fundamental predictions of their materialist theories. * Head-banging: As reported by LiveScience, cutting-edge researchers running a major National Science Foundation evolution experiment admitted that, "If Darwin was right", they would have documented the evidence for his claimed insight on competition and the (supposed) tree of life. Instead, their results falsified Darwin's claim. Of the 60 species of algae being studied for a five year period, Charles Darwin predicted how well and how poorly such organisms would compete for resources, based on their respective distances from each other on the (supposed) tree of life. But of the outcome, "It was completely unexpected. We sat there banging our heads against the wall. Darwin's hypothesis has been with us for so long, how can it not be right? ... We should be able to look at the [supposed] Tree of Life, and evolution should make it clear who will win in competition and who will lose. But the traits that regulate competition can't be predicted from the Tree of Life." For more, see LiveScience and rsr.org/darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life. * 2015 Update: One of many discoveries that could added to this list of shocked evolutionists is the black hole at 12.8 billion light years away the mass of 12 billion Suns that "simply can't exist" by the big bang theory, but does. * 2019 Update: Moon may be tectonically active, geologists shaken, is the headline in National Geographic. "A new look at Apollo-era seismic data revealed that the moon's insides might be warmer than scientists thought possible." See this also at rsr.org/tess#moon in our classic List of the Transient Events of the Solar System! * Stunned without the Foggiest Notion: So "astounding" are the "similarities" of Hox developmental regulatory genes across the animal kingdom that prominent evolutionist Sean Carroll wrote that, “no biologist had even the foggiest notion that such similarities could exist between genes of such different animals.” Because little in biology makes sense in the light of evolution, a world full of neo-Darwinist scientists never predicted this astounding consistency because, by their belief system, "The evolutionary lines that led to flies and mice diverged more than 500 million years ago..." So, this world famous biologist admits that, "Such sequence similarity was just stunning." Of course this falsified one of the most fundamental predictions of neo-Darwinism. [This item is a post-show update.] * Horrendous: Dr. David Page of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., said in the journal Nature that the human and chimp Y chromosomes are "horrendously different from each other." Horrendously? Is that a scientific term? Why not just, "different?" Is Saturn horrendously different from Mars? Why horrendously so? Because for modern Darwinism to not lose face, chimps have to be shown to be our closest relatives. Yet 15% of the gorilla genome is closer to us, and the chimp's Y chromosome (that which makes us males... well, males...) is so massively different that we have yet more evidence on its face that the human genome is not 98.5% identical to the chim. For more, see rsr.rog/list-of-genomes-that-just-dont-fit. * Jaw-dropping: National Geographic quotes NASA's Messenger team member David Blewett saying, as RSR documents evolutionary scientists saying all the time regarding major observations that contradict predictions based on their most fundamental claims, "this jaw-dropping thing that nobody ever predicted," that Mercury has actively forming surface features, something judged impossible for a tiny, four-billion year old inert rock. :) * Socks Blown Off: Close-up photos showed the youthful appearance of Pluto as did the images of its largest moon: "We originally thought Charon would be an ancient terrain covered in craters," said New Horizons team member Cathy Olkin. "So when we saw the pictures this morning, it just blew our socks off." And panning upward from their feet, Discover Magazine reports on NASA's Pluto team including principal investigator Alan Stern's eyes popping out of his head. * Baffled by Asteroids that Look Like Comets: See phys.org, NASA, EarthSky, and AmazingSpace.  * And the Beat Goes On: For more really fun examples, just listen to today's program! And as an honorable mention, consider the response of the scientists who found the presence of modern bacteria, etc. in these allegedly 220 Mya microbes :) and the description of 42 "oddball" blue stars in the Milky Way! * More Baffling Still: After 150 years of searching, evolutionists have found the best evidence ever discovered for Darwinism, caught on tape no less...   Today's Resource: Please check out our newest science resource... The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set or HD Download Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory. DVD Vol. 1 1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture 2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence DVD Vol. 2 3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing!

En este episodio vamos a hablar de la evolución, de cómo los animales cambian a lo largo del tiempo, y de la selección natural, que es la explicación más exitosa que tenemos hasta el momento para entender como funciona. Aquí el ensayo de Dobzhansky: https://biologie-lernprogramme.de/daten/programme/js/homologer/daten/lit/Dobzhansky.pdf

In this episode, we continue the series on race and intelligence by heading across the pond to discuss work of the knighted psychologist, Sir Cyril Burt, and the two British ex-pats who worked in the U.S., psychometrician Raymond Cattell and anthropologist Ashley Montagu. Transcript: http://speakingofrace.ua.edu/uploads/1/1/0/5/110557873/race_and_intelligence_part_2.pdf Some Resources: Cattell, R. B. (1933). Psychology and social progress: Mankind and destiny from the standpoint of a scientist. London: C.W. Daniel. Dobzhansky, T. and M. F. Ashley Montagu. (1947). Natural Selection and the Mental Capacities of Mankind. Science, 105(2736), 587-90. Jensen, A. R. (1974). Kinship correlations reported by Sir Cyril Burt. Behavior Genetics, 4(1), 1-28. Kamin, Leon J. (1974). The Science and Politics of I.Q. Social Research 41(3), 387-425. For those who never saw him, here’s Montagu talking anthropology, although nothing to do with race: Ashley Montagu on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson (Sept. 13, 1974). Montagu, Ashley. (1962). The Concept of Race. American Anthropologist 64(5), 919-28. Montagu, Ashley, ed. (1974). Race and IQ. New York: Oxford University Press. Montagu, M.F.A. (1942). Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race. New York: Columbia University Press. Montagu, MF Ashley. (1945). Intelligence of Northern Negroes and Southern Whites in the First World War. The American Journal of Psychology 58(2), 161-88. Sperling, Susan. (2000). Ashley Montagu (1905–1999). American Anthropologist 102(3), 583-88. Thompson, Matthew. (1998). The Problem of Mental Deficiency: Eugenics, Democracy, and Social Policy in Britain, c.1870-1959. New York: Oxford-Clarendon Press. Tucker, W. H. (2010). The Cattell controversy: Race, science, and ideology. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Jorge Quillfeldt (Biofísica/UFRGS) e Jeferson Arenzon (Física/UFRGS) conversam com o professor do Depto. de Genética (UFRGS), Aldo Mellender de Araújo, sobre a teoria da Evolução. Neste primeiro episódio, partimos das contribuições de Darwin e Wallace, chegando à chamada Síntese Moderna que agrega principalmente conceitos de genética ao mecanismo, descoberto por Darwin, da seleção natural. Com isso se encerra o chamado eclipse do darwinismo, período de fortes críticas à teoria, dando lugar ao consenso científico, expresso perfeitamente por Dobzhansky, de que nada faz sentido na biologia se não for à luz da evolução.

In this inaugural presentation to incoming UC San Diego Medical School students, Dr. Ajit Varki, Executive Co-Director of CARTA, provides an evolutionary perspective on understanding human health and disease. Why? Because The biological aspects of medicine are rooted in understanding the evolution of our species, and those of other organisms that interact with us in health and disease. Thus, to paraphrase Dobzhansky, “nothing in the biological aspects of medicine makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 31730]

In this inaugural presentation to incoming UC San Diego Medical School students, Dr. Ajit Varki, Executive Co-Director of CARTA, provides an evolutionary perspective on understanding human health and disease. Why? Because The biological aspects of medicine are rooted in understanding the evolution of our species, and those of other organisms that interact with us in health and disease. Thus, to paraphrase Dobzhansky, “nothing in the biological aspects of medicine makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 31730]

SynTalk thinks about the meanings, implications and the future of coexistence between & amongst the several biological species on earth. The interaction space between species is explored via known strategies such as symbiosis, predation, parasitism, antagonism, mutualism, commensalism, & competition, while constantly wondering if ‘nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of ‘selfishness’’. The concepts are derived off / from Sushruta, Charak, Hegel, Malthus, Darwin, Hamilton, Kropotkin, Gandhi, Dobzhansky, Hawking, & Dawkins, among others. Is there often selfishness in nature without the ‘self’. Why does the host change its genetic makeup to coexist with the parasite? Why do most species exist in communitarian groups? Why does a predator never run out of prey in nature (in stable equilibrium)? How it may be unavoidable to ‘tolerate the most intolerable’. How sickle cell anaemia developed as a response to malaria. What is the difference between the antibiotic and aseptic conditions, in the context of the coexistence of different species? The links between human beings, mosquitoes, Chernobyl disaster, raptor birds, Ayurveda, dinosaurs, consciousness, natural selection, Tom & Jerry, oranges, sibling rivalry, wolves, & tribes. How do dominant & exploitative social structures result from the ensemble of unevenly evolved groups (in terms of techno economic capacity). How autonomy of certain groups (the weakest doing menial jobs, say) that had their pristine existence can be annihilated, incorporated, subordinated, subjected, or even destroyed institutionally. How cooperation amongst the uneven develop? Does consciousness promote cooperation? Is culture (merely) a survival strategy? How (bacterial) mitochondria and chloroplasts (green alga) getting incorporated into eukaryotic cells was a significant evolutionary event. Are plants and animals also cruel? How Toxoplasma gondii insidiously finds its way back into the cat (the definitive host) from the rodents (the dead end). Can there be sacrifice in the Darwinian world? How culture is a complex mix up of both material & ideological practices. Can we truly understand the concept of queen bee (without the metonymy)? Is resource abundance always temporary in the biological world? Why kids don’t always agree with their mothers? Why does each orange segment often have one dominant seed? Does the critical self reflexive faculty of human beings make them fundamentally different? Is techno capitalism likely to be a key actor? Will human beings go out and colonize other celestial bodies, even as we coexist on Earth with other species? How human consciousness, survival instinct and (the bacterial) gut instinct could be the ultimate assets for the future? The SynTalkrs are: Prof. K.N. Ganeshaiah (agricultural sciences, writing, UAS, Bangalore), Prof. Rajan Gurukkal (history, social theory, IISc, Bangalore), & Prof. Swati Patankar (molecular microbiology, IITB, Mumbai).

Evolutionary approaches to linguistics have notoriously had a rather chequered history, being associated with vague and unfalsifiable claims about the motivations for the origins of language. It seems as though the subject has only recently come in from the cold, and yet there are already rich traditions of research in several distinct fields that offer relevant insights: insights that are crucial if we consider Dobzhansky’s maxim, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution”, also to apply to human language. In his two-volume (so far) work, James Hurford brings together many of these disparate strands of research and endeavours to answer the question of how humans, uniquely among extant species, came to have such elaborative, productive, referential language. His work is at once vast and authoritative, stimulating and original, and highly accessible. It serves both to introduce new ideas and to draw out potential connections between familiar ones. It’s critical without being dismissive, and seems to succeed in its goal of being genuinely interdisciplinary. This first interview revisits the 2007 book, The Origins of Meaning (Oxford University Press, 2007), which sets out some ideas as to how both meaning (as a relatively ‘private’ matter) and communication (a ‘public’ one) came to be elaborated in humans. We discuss how meaning can be characterised in a way that is evolutionarily friendly, and the kinds of neural processes that might underlie the shape of propositional thought. We look at the relation that might be argued between visual attention and (pre-)linguistic semantics. And we turn to studies of monkey alarm calls, and ask whether the origins of referential meaning are already exhibited by our distant primate cousins. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Evolutionary approaches to linguistics have notoriously had a rather chequered history, being associated with vague and unfalsifiable claims about the motivations for the origins of language. It seems as though the subject has only recently come in from the cold, and yet there are already rich traditions of research in several distinct fields that offer relevant insights: insights that are crucial if we consider Dobzhansky's maxim, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution”, also to apply to human language. In his two-volume (so far) work, James Hurford brings together many of these disparate strands of research and endeavours to answer the question of how humans, uniquely among extant species, came to have such elaborative, productive, referential language. His work is at once vast and authoritative, stimulating and original, and highly accessible. It serves both to introduce new ideas and to draw out potential connections between familiar ones. It's critical without being dismissive, and seems to succeed in its goal of being genuinely interdisciplinary. This first interview revisits the 2007 book, The Origins of Meaning (Oxford University Press, 2007), which sets out some ideas as to how both meaning (as a relatively ‘private' matter) and communication (a ‘public' one) came to be elaborated in humans. We discuss how meaning can be characterised in a way that is evolutionarily friendly, and the kinds of neural processes that might underlie the shape of propositional thought. We look at the relation that might be argued between visual attention and (pre-)linguistic semantics. And we turn to studies of monkey alarm calls, and ask whether the origins of referential meaning are already exhibited by our distant primate cousins.

Evolutionary approaches to linguistics have notoriously had a rather chequered history, being associated with vague and unfalsifiable claims about the motivations for the origins of language. It seems as though the subject has only recently come in from the cold, and yet there are already rich traditions of research in several distinct fields that offer relevant insights: insights that are crucial if we consider Dobzhansky’s maxim, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution”, also to apply to human language. In his two-volume (so far) work, James Hurford brings together many of these disparate strands of research and endeavours to answer the question of how humans, uniquely among extant species, came to have such elaborative, productive, referential language. His work is at once vast and authoritative, stimulating and original, and highly accessible. It serves both to introduce new ideas and to draw out potential connections between familiar ones. It’s critical without being dismissive, and seems to succeed in its goal of being genuinely interdisciplinary. This first interview revisits the 2007 book, The Origins of Meaning (Oxford University Press, 2007), which sets out some ideas as to how both meaning (as a relatively ‘private’ matter) and communication (a ‘public’ one) came to be elaborated in humans. We discuss how meaning can be characterised in a way that is evolutionarily friendly, and the kinds of neural processes that might underlie the shape of propositional thought. We look at the relation that might be argued between visual attention and (pre-)linguistic semantics. And we turn to studies of monkey alarm calls, and ask whether the origins of referential meaning are already exhibited by our distant primate cousins. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Evolutionary approaches to linguistics have notoriously had a rather chequered history, being associated with vague and unfalsifiable claims about the motivations for the origins of language. It seems as though the subject has only recently come in from the cold, and yet there are already rich traditions of research in several distinct fields that offer relevant insights: insights that are crucial if we consider Dobzhansky’s maxim, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution”, also to apply to human language. In his two-volume (so far) work, James Hurford brings together many of these disparate strands of research and endeavours to answer the question of how humans, uniquely among extant species, came to have such elaborative, productive, referential language. His work is at once vast and authoritative, stimulating and original, and highly accessible. It serves both to introduce new ideas and to draw out potential connections between familiar ones. It’s critical without being dismissive, and seems to succeed in its goal of being genuinely interdisciplinary. This first interview revisits the 2007 book, The Origins of Meaning (Oxford University Press, 2007), which sets out some ideas as to how both meaning (as a relatively ‘private’ matter) and communication (a ‘public’ one) came to be elaborated in humans. We discuss how meaning can be characterised in a way that is evolutionarily friendly, and the kinds of neural processes that might underlie the shape of propositional thought. We look at the relation that might be argued between visual attention and (pre-)linguistic semantics. And we turn to studies of monkey alarm calls, and ask whether the origins of referential meaning are already exhibited by our distant primate cousins. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices