The Evolution of the Placenta


(Peaceful Science) #1

Those following the ongoing debate about common descent (i.e. evolution) in the ID community might enjoy this recent article by pro-CD ID advocate VJ Torley.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/the-amazing-placenta-a-reply-to-dr-ann-gauger/

If it isn’t already obvious, I did help him with some of the science, but his article is quite good at taking very complicated scientific topics and putting them in terms that the public understands. If you are so inclined, consider leaving a comment on the article thanking for his work. For collaborating with me, he has endured a fair amount of abuse in the ID camp.


(sy_garte) #2

That is a great article. One of the important parts of it that might get overlooked is the finding that syncytin forms follow in the expected phylogenetic pathways. The same thing has been found consistently for dozens of protein families. The crucial point (mentioned in the article) is that if that had ever NOT been seen, it would disprove (or at least severely shake) common descent. In other words, contrary to many creationists’ claims, evolution is easily falsifiable by genetic tests, and it has passed each and every one of them.


#3

Yes! I’ve always been astounded that anyone would insist that “the Theory of Evolution is not science because it can’t be tested.” Is there any theory in all of science that has been put to the test more than the Theory of Evolution? That’s not hyperbole.

Genome mapping has been an awesome test of evolution theory. After all, more than a century of phylogeny trees did not find further confirmation at the molecular level in the genomes of more and more species, the Theory of Evolution would have been left in shambles. Evolution deniers apparently understand that and so many of them even claim aloud “DNA comparisons have totally destroyed the Theory of Evolution!” (If all else fails, simply resort to lying with a straight face!)


#4

Nope. It has been tested over and over again, and passes each test with winning colors.


#5

Then we are failing our children and future decision-makers if we fail to make that fact clear.

It seems to be an area where our democratic heritage tends to create the impression (in the minds of many) that the opinions of non-scientists (and even the scientists who are not specialists in the relevant fields) matter in terms of what appears in science textbooks. How can we better convey that the Theory of Evolution is so overwhelmingly supported by the enormous quantities of evidence and the consilience of evidence when high school textbooks still have to walk lightly?

Of course, I’ve drifted into another topic—when the thread is about the evolution of the placenta. But I’ve noticed that a lot of threads on this website which directly refer to the facts of evolution get distracted by science deniers saying that evolution is not science or simply isn’t established by sufficient evidence. That saddens me, because in every case it soon becomes evidence that they have a poor understanding of evolution.


#6

Yes, people like two sides to every story. But as somebody once said, “there is nothing so unequal as the equal treatment of unequal things.” And that sort of thinking becomes dangerous when speaking of things like vaccines and global warming.

Not all high school textbooks have to skirt around evolution. It really depends on the school system. The better systems in good areas where people have education have no problems with evolution.


(system) #7

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.