I found this to be interesting. While everyone knows (except seven Texas SBOE members) that
dogs descended from wolves, there's a new finding that dogs have provided
a gene for darker coats to North American wolves, giving them selective advantage. So, dogs have made wolves more dog-like.
What's the selective advantage? Up to 70% of the gray wolves in North America have this darker coat. Here's an intriguing possibility:
. . . it turns out [the same] gene is involved in humans in helping bolster the immune system to fight off infection," Barsh said.
Wow! Evidence of evolution is everywhere! We share genes with dogs and wolves! Let's be sure our school kids in Texas are aware of this.
I found this to be interesting. While everyone knows (except seven Texas SBOE members) that dogs descended from wolves, there's a new finding that dogs have provided a gene for darker coats to North American wolves, giving them selective advantage. So, dogs have made wolves more dog-like.
What's the selective advantage? Up to 70% of the gray wolves in North America have this darker coat. Here's an intriguing possibility:
2 comments:
I loved how in the comments of another place where I read about this research, someone basically said, "duh! This is news? This is how natural selection is supposed to work."
Well, sweetie, we have some cretins here in Texas to whom any news about evidence of evolution is very startling indeed. Kinda makes them wonder if the should admit, "I love Jesus, but I buy into a little evolution sometimes."
Hey, just saw this article on Slashdot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/science/10essa.html?_r=1
"MacArthur fellow Carl Safina, an adjunct professor at Stony Brook University, has an interesting essay in the NYTimes that says that equating evolution with Charles Darwin opened the door for creationism by ignoring 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution — Gregor Mendel's patterns of heredity, the discovery of DNA, developmental biology, studies documenting evolution in nature, and evolution's role in medicine and disease. Darwinism implies an ideology adhering to one man's dictates, like Marxism, says Safina. He adds that nobody talks about Newtonism or Einsteinism, and that by making Darwin 'into a sacred fetish misses the essence of his teaching.' By turning Darwin into an 'ism,' scientists created the opening for creationism, with the 'isms' implying equivalence. 'By propounding "Darwinism," even scientists and science writers perpetuate an impression that evolution is about one man, one book, one theory,' writes Safina. '"Darwinism" implies that biological scientists "believe in" Darwin's "theory." It's as if, since 1860, scientists have just ditto-headed Darwin rather than challenging and testing his ideas, or adding vast new knowledge.'"
Post a Comment