Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2:
Line 2: − − Regarding the implications of Lenski's experiment, [[intelligent design]] theorist [[Michael Behe]] wrote: − − * In ''[[The Edge of Evolution]]'' I had argued that the extreme rarity of the development of chloroquine resistance in malaria was likely the result of the need for several mutations to occur before the trait appeared. Even though the evolutionary literature contains discussions of multiple mutations (5), Darwinian reviewers drew back in horror, acted as if I had blasphemed, and argued desperately that a series of single beneficial mutations certainly could do the trick. Now here we have Richard Lenski affirming that the evolution of some pretty simple cellular features likely requires multiple mutations. − * If the development of many of the features of the cell required multiple mutations during the course of evolution, then the cell is beyond Darwinian explanation. I show in The Edge of Evolution that it is very reasonable to conclude they did. [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3U696N278Z93O] − Line 145:
Line 139: + +
moved Behe's discussion to a footnote
Richard Lenski is best known for his 20-year old E. coli experiment in which he claims to have captured evolution in progress, saying that bacteria made minor changes in the long-term laboratory study while insisting that it was not due to contamination.
Richard Lenski is best known for his 20-year old E. coli experiment in which he claims to have captured evolution in progress, saying that bacteria made minor changes in the long-term laboratory study while insisting that it was not due to contamination.
The 2008 paper he co-authored was [[peer review]]ed in 14 days, sparking obvious questions regarding potential problems <ref>See [[Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog]].</ref> about the thoroughness of the review. The statistical analysis in Lenski's paper has been criticized for having serious flaws.<ref>See [[Flaws in Richard Lenski Study]].</ref>
The 2008 paper he co-authored was [[peer review]]ed in 14 days, sparking obvious questions regarding potential problems <ref>See [[Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog]].</ref> about the thoroughness of the review. The statistical analysis in Lenski's paper has been criticized for having serious flaws.<ref>See [[Flaws in Richard Lenski Study]].</ref>
Dr. William Dembski explained, "In other words, the computer programmers built into the simulation what they thought evolution needed to make it work. The validity of this study therefore depends on whether the simulation faithfully models biological reality."<ref>http://www.designinference.com/documents/2003.09.UncDiss_Intro_Contribs.pdf</ref>
Dr. William Dembski explained, "In other words, the computer programmers built into the simulation what they thought evolution needed to make it work. The validity of this study therefore depends on whether the simulation faithfully models biological reality."<ref>http://www.designinference.com/documents/2003.09.UncDiss_Intro_Contribs.pdf</ref>
Others have commented on Lenski's work while taking it at face value.<ref>[[Michael Behe]] wrote, in ''[[The Edge of Evolution]]'', "I had argued that the extreme rarity of the development of chloroquine resistance in malaria was likely the result of the need for several mutations to occur before the trait appeared. Even though the evolutionary literature contains discussions of multiple mutations (5), Darwinian reviewers drew back in horror, acted as if I had blasphemed, and argued desperately that a series of single beneficial mutations certainly could do the trick. Now here we have Richard Lenski affirming that the evolution of some pretty simple cellular features likely requires multiple mutations." Behe also said, "If the development of many of the features of the cell required multiple mutations during the course of evolution, then the cell is beyond Darwinian explanation. I show in The Edge of Evolution that it is very reasonable to conclude they did."[http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3U696N278Z93O]</ref>
==See Also==
==See Also==