Time in a bottle: Scientists watch evolution unfold over 40,000 generations!

[Minimalist]

I have read Dawkins latest book and so this comes as no surprise to me. But it is awesome to see evolution in action! Although, alot of theists are no longer denying evolution, they are saying god did it! Lol

Yeah, nothing new under the sun, C/P.

Alexander Von Humboldt
"There are three stages of scientific discovery: first people deny it is true; then they deny it is important; finally they credit the wrong person."
— Alexander Von Humboldt

[chatpilot]

Agreed Sae just stating that I read the book. He is a good biologist but as a writer I find him very dry and boring most times. There, all better now?

[Minimalist]

Agreed Sae just stating that I read the book. He is a good biologist but as a writer I find him very dry and boring most times. There, all better now?

Dawkins does for biology what Bart Ehrman does for Historical Criticism of the bible and Israel Finkelstein does for archaeology. They all summarize serious scholarship on the topics involved and put it into language that a layman can understand. There is only so much that one can do to make any of this stuff "exciting." But I have waded through actual peer-reviewed archaeological journal articles about pottery finds in Philistia and can assure you that a cure for insomnia has indeed been found if only someone could bottle it.

[leo-rcc]

But I have waded through actual peer-reviewed archaeological journal articles about pottery finds in Philistia and can assure you that a cure for insomnia has indeed been found if only someone could bottle it.

I have over 1 Gigabyte worth of scientific papers on evolutionary research in pdf, and every paper is a guaranteed snooze-fest.

[Minimalist]

Damn right, Leo.

Hollywood is never going to buy the movie rights to this one!

http://jbiol.com/content/9/2/14

Acoel and platyhelminth models for stem-cell research

[chatpilot]

So true Min, reading biology is a definitive cure for insomnia.

[Autumnlicious]

Dawkins does for biology what Bart Ehrman does for Historical Criticism of the bible and Israel Finkelstein does for archaeology. They all summarize serious scholarship on the topics involved and put it into language that a layman can understand. There is only so much that one can do to make any of this stuff "exciting." But I have waded through actual peer-reviewed archaeological journal articles about pottery finds in Philistia and can assure you that a cure for insomnia has indeed been found if only someone could bottle it.

Pro tip: If you cannot imagine yourself cogently explaining something to a regular six year old, then you most likely do not understand the topic at hand well enough.

I find the philosophy of color vision and associated papers to be exceptionally boring - it is all supposition and little science. Talk about a snoozefest.

[Thor]

They state it as different to 'Macro-evolution' which they say there is no evidence for, it is merely a lot of micro changes.

Then how do they explain Archaeopteryx and Tiktaalik? Not to mention vestigial organs.

[Minimalist]

Then how do they explain Archaeopteryx and Tiktaalik? Not to mention vestigial organs.

As Richard Dawkins recounts in his "Greatest Show on Earth" they ignore them and then demand evidence.

Creationists are quite possibly the stupidest people on the planet.[/code]

[Thor]

Then how do they explain Archaeopteryx and Tiktaalik? Not to mention vestigial organs.

As Richard Dawkins recounts in his "Greatest Show on Earth" they ignore them and then demand evidence.

Creationists are quite possibly the stupidest people on the planet.[/code]

What gets me is when they take actual evidence and then shoehorn it to fit their preconceived beliefs. I've had debates with these dimwits and they'll insist that fossilized sea creatures found on mountains is evidence of Noah's flood! (Never mind that it actually proves that the mountain was once the sea floor. These yahoos don't understand how tectonic plates work.) They've also argued that the Grand Canyon is more proof of Noah's flood. The canyon formed when all that water suddenly went rushing down the river, don't ya know! (Again, never mind that something like the Grand Canyon could not possibly have formed as the result of a single cataclysmic event.) But the grand prize has to go to the imbeciles who insist that man and dinosaurs lived together! Apparently, they can't deny that dinosaurs existed, so they are forced to take the absolutely preposterous position that dinosaurs lived with man. Hey, whatever works just so long as you don't have to face reality!