(September 18, 2013 at 8:17 pm)Zazzy Wrote: I don't have time to watch this all- but it's clearly about epigenetics. Darwin had a lot of specifics wrong because he knew nothing about DNA (gemmules, as he called it), but only if you're picky. He couldn't know that plants, for instance, routinely double their genomes and are fine with this. He didn't know about transposons, or resident genomes, or methylation of particular DNA sequences- all of which can have immediate and major effects on a genome or a phenotype. But he did damned well for someone in his position.
And Lamarck was likewise a fine scientist (and the real father of evolutionary theory, IMO), but it's a stretch to link epigenetics to him.
Calling Lamarck the real father of evolutionary theory is not just a stretch, it's completely wrong.
His view was that the environment drove changes and those changes were heritable. This is utterly incorrect in every respect.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
