Templeton

[rwatts]

http://science.sciencemag.org/conten...&et_cid=434140

While this kind of stuff can be a bit subversive, I really don't see anything wrong with it.

Good on Templeton and good on the researchers for taking it.


Other opinions?

[rogue06]

Not much to go by from the summary but it sounds a bit like they are looking at Lamarckism.

[shunyadragon]

Source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6284/394?utm_campaign=toc_sci-mag_2016-04-21&et_rid=54857669&et_cid=434140

Critics are against evolutionary biologists accepting this money and argue that evolutionary theory already embraces the best of these ideas.

© Copyright Original Source

Fe Fi Fo Fum, I smell the blood of a snake oil salesman, . . or some scientists have too much time on their hands to to real science.

[rogue06]

Source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6284/394?utm_campaign=toc_sci-mag_2016-04-21&et_rid=54857669&et_cid=434140

Critics are against evolutionary biologists accepting this money and argue that evolutionary theory already embraces the best of these ideas.

© Copyright Original Source

Fe Fi Fo Fum, I smell the blood of a snake oil salesman, . . or some scientists have too much time on their hands to to real science.

[shunyadragon]

Sure let them go ahead. I would like to see some of these 'ideas' that did not correspond to the expectations of that model so let them continue investigating other possibilities. So far the above specialties, which I believe are explainable by the theory of evolution. Beyond this all I have seen is anecdotal conjecture.