Ecolog:
Pryde is right on. But the reality is that evolution is misunderstood by a
lot of people, and clarity on this subject would go a long way toward
resolving some of the conflict arising therefrom. That will require clear
statements from evolutionary biologists for starters, and perhaps a lot of
article-writing and TV production that not only is more careful about the
semantics used,* but actually getting the ball rolling toward rolling back
the misconceptions.
But first, you catch the rabbit--and even make the stew. Then serve it
until it is found delicious. (As long as it's not bushmeat.) That is, get
this matter thoroughly discussed by evolutionary biologists and others who
understand the merits and deficiencies of the two "sides," then "make it
news."
WT
*advancement, progress . . .
----- Original Message -----
From: Liz Pryde
To: Wayne Tyson
Cc: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Discussion Panel Topic Suggestions
In Darwin's "Origin" the theory was one of adaptation, not advancement.
Unfortunately Spencer coined the "fittest" remark and that was a popular
mode of thinking at the time - when people were rather self-congratulatory
about their scientific understandings of the natural world (how clever!).
So, evolution was originally meant as an adaptation to the chance
environment. It may or may not have been 'better' than the previous model,
but it survived through chance, and we assume, advantage. This doesn't
necessarily make it advantageous throughout time.
I'm sure we can all come up with improvements to the human body ;).
Liz
On 06/12/2012, at 2:47 PM, Wayne Tyson <landr...@cox.net> wrote:
Joey and Ecolog
I am the author of question 3, and the point is exactly the one made
by Smokey, with which I fully agree. There do seem to be people who seem to
be of the opinion that evolution IS progress, however. I posted this
question to a well-known evolutionary biology forum and Richard Dawkins
replied in the affirmative; when I asked for further clarification, there
was no response (except one which agreed with my point; several others were
outraged, and I ended up having to issue an "apology." David Attenborough,
in one of his excellent TV programs used the term "advance," in discussing
the matter with one of the world's top paleontologists, whom I emailed the
raw question; he responded in the affirmative, that the creatures he was
most famous for studying did "advance." When I responded by asking if he
would then conclude that the genus Homo would then be an example of
"evolutionary advance," the correspondence was terminated.
My straw polling amongst "the public" tilts strongly in favor of
"progress" or "advancement" with time, and while I'm not sure of all the
sources that have contributed to this impression, the Time-Life book "Human
Evolution," with its famous/infamous "March of Progress" illustration
beginning with a quadruped ape and ending with an upright, apparently Aryan
male. I know of no studies that have been done on this issue, and
attempting to raise the discussion on respected websites causes more
blowback than the kind of clarity that Smokey's concise statement brings to
the discussion.
Ecolog is a respected and large listserv. Will there be further
comments, either in support or in refutation of Smokey's explanation, or is
this subject one of those academic "third rails" that no one dare touch?
Those who fear posting their comments here could send Smokey and me their
comments directly if they want to avoid reprisals (the subject of reprisals
for posts reared its ugly head several months ago, and believe it or not,
the emails I received were not limited to students; I got several from
professors).
On the other hand, if this subject is considered unimportant, "proper"
actions can be taken, eh?
WT
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joey Smokey" <
northwestbird...@gmail.com>
To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Discussion Panel Topic Suggestions
Jason,
I strongly advise against the third question. Evolution is not
directional,
and the question is worded to suggest that it is. If the point of the
question is to dispel the idea of evolution being directional, then
it
would be fine.
There are many common misconceptions of organisms "progressing"
through
evolution. The most common is the typical classroom image of human
evolution moving from ape-like toward human-like over time.
Transition
species in the fossil record do not suggest a progressive change
from one
type of body form into another. The transition to terrestrial life
is the
same way; transition species such as Tiktaalik, Eusthenopteron, and
Ichthyostega did not "march along" until they were well-adapted for
life on
land. Evolution does not craft "improved" species or "advanced"
species. It
simply results in organisms being well-adapted for their environment
at a
given time.
In regards to the fourth question, ecological time refers to
immediate
interactions between organisms and their environment. It does lead
into
evolutionary time and the change in allelic frequencies through
generations. So, ecological interactions can and do have meaningful
impact
on evolutionary trajectories of species.
I think the first two questions will lead into some good discussion.
Best of luck on your discussion panel,
Joey Smokey
WSU Vancouver
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:37 AM, jason.strickland <
jason.strickl...@knights.ucf.edu> wrote:
Dear group,
I have compiled some of the ideas that were given to me about my
discussion panel. The response was much lower than I expected so
if you
have any ideas, feel free to share those as well. Thank you to all
those
that contributed.
1. Will most organisms be capable of adapting quickly enough
to
respond to climate change/sea level rise to be evolutionarily
relevant?
2. What impact will Genetically Modified Organisms have on
the
ecology and evolution of the modified species and other species?
3. Do organisms progress/improve/advance through evolution?
4. Do ecological processes/interactions last long enough to
have any
meaningful impact on the evolutionary trajectory of a species?
Please share your thoughts on these topics or suggest others.
Cheers,
Jason Strickland
jason.strickl...@knights.ucf.edu
From: jason.strickland
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 3:59 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Discussion Panel Topic Suggestions
Dear group,
I am currently working on forming a discussion panel that will
include two
ecologists and two evolutionary biologists to discuss topics that
involve
merging ecology and evolution. The discussion will be in front of
150-200
students ranging from undergraduates to post-docs (all in
biology). The
panel will happen on a Saturday morning so it needs to be an
exciting
discussion to hold the audience's interest and cause them to ask
questions.
I am looking for topics/questions that the two fields do not
completely
agree on. The goal is to have the panel disagree on topics to
allow the
students to learn and be entertained. If anyone can suggest topics
or
questions that ecologists and evolutionary biologists have
different
viewpoints on, they would be greatly appreciated. I have a few
topics
already, but wanted to ask a larger audience to suggest topics to
determine
if there are certain topics/questions that come up frequently.
Feel free to
email me directly (jason.strickl...@knights.ucf.edu<mailto:
jason.strickl...@knights.ucf.edu>) or respond to this post with
your
suggestions.
Thank you in advance for your help,
Jason Strickland
jason.strickl...@knights.ucf.edu<mailto:
jason.strickl...@knights.ucf.edu>
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2634/5436 - Release Date:
12/04/12
Liz Pryde
PhD Candidate (off-campus @ The University of Melbourne)
School of Earth and Environmental Sciences
James Cook University, QLD
elizabethpr...@gmail.com
epr...@unimelb.edu.au
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2634/5438 - Release Date: 12/05/12
