Princeton Scientists Discover Proteins That Control Evolution

[Frame57]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

http://io9.com/5083673/princeton-sci...trol-evolution

This has been an interesting day for science...

I believe Mendel had that pegged years ago...

[Letum]

Originally Posted by August

Aren't those words normally associated with Intelligent Design?

Yes, they are very appropriate in discussion of super-natural processes.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Letum

Bunkum!

"Purpose", "direction" and "meaning" are terms that have no place in
discussion of natural processes.

Have you even read what I said? That is exactly my point. It is interpretation of observations we have made. Creationists give it this interpretation, Darwinists give it a different, what stays the same is the observation itself. These interpretations we consider to be the tools of what we - on a meta-level - call "evolution". If that makes sense or not, if the interpretation is representative for the reality we just observed, is a different thing, and for reality itself - unimportant, for it simply is.

A simple hierarchy of "substance of terms", that'S all what I talk about
(an many scientists as well, btw, or did you think is all my own'S mind's result?). On your referring to tectonics I leave you alone, "tectonics" and "evolution" have so different levels of accessability for observation that I just can disagree with you. Tectonic movement is acccessible for direct experience if you extent your senses by according sensors, you can measure it'S speed and acceleration, and must not indirectly do so, but can do it directly. But you cannot directly observe "evolution" - you can only indirectly conclude on it. If you hear a distant "ouch", you can conclude on somebody feeling a pain. You can conclude on somebody making a joke. Or that it is just your imagination. But when you hit your finger with a hammer an yell "ouch" yourself, then there is no doubt left that it is about a physical pain indeed, and the reality of the event and its substance is beyond doubt. The first example is interpretation and imagination. the second is not. And if you call the first event by a meta-term and talk of "ouchism", then this equals what the term evolution means - in the end: nothing we could be sure of, just our own way to add meaning and structure to a reality that else we would perceive as too chaotic and unmanagable as if we could bear to live in it. Man in the first is a pattern-creating organism. We do not perceive directly (except in mediation and comparable states of mind), we construct categories and orders the very moment we perceive. . Tectonic movement we can only experience by using hightech sensors and measuring equipment, these are extensions of our senses to experience a dimension of time that is so slow-moving that usually we would not realise it except when it speeds up - during earthquakes. But if tectonic movement would take place at the speed of a Porsche Cabrio, you would directly feel the experience, too, like you feel the wind in your face. That'S what sets the quality of the two terms "tectonic movement" and "evolution" apart.

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by Letum

Yes, they are very appropriate in discussion of super-natural processes.

But unfortunately, they're not acceptable for scientific discussions. Pseudoscience is fond of using the good old supernatural defense, however.