Why “tweaking Darwinism a little” ain’t gonna get the job done – Denis Noble, the Martin Luther of Evolutionary Biology

Denis Noble, one of the judges for the Evolution 2.0 Prize, discusses in this interview why we can’t just put lipstick on a pig – why the public needs to be aware that evolutionary theory has undergone a revolution, and how this affects not only religious and philosophical discussions but policies and actions in medicine economics and politics.

Learn More About The Largest Origin of Life Science Prize In History: https://www.naturalcode.org

Download The First 3 Chapters of Evolution 2.0 For Free, Here – https://evo-2.org/3-free-chapters/

Where Did Life And The Genetic Code Come From? Can The Answer Build Superior AI? The #1 Mystery In Science Now Has A $10 Million Prize. Learn More About It, Here – https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0

4 Responses

  1. Richard Cocks says:

    Hi, Perry. I’m a fan of Evolution 2.0. I’m wondering if you have addressed the topic of “radiation breeding” somewhere. It is claimed that useful new features of plants were created in this manner. Would this be an example of transposition, and thus not true randomness? https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/28/science/28crop.html

    • Richard, hi and welcome. Great question.

      This is not terribly different from how Barbara McClintock or Evelyn Witkin produced the changes in their plants. Light doses of radiation damage DNA, then repair mechanisms kick in and fix the damage in ways that the organism finds acceptable, according to rules that we only dimly understand. I do not know for sure but transposition would be a reasonable guess.

      If you read carefully, Evolution 2.0 does mention this kind of behavior – that the fruit fly radiation experiments bombed but controlled versions of similar experiments produced transposition and gene repair.

  2. Mark McGlathery says:

    Is it true that in every case of gene mutations that the viability of a species decreases and not increases as Darwins evolution theory suggests?

    • No.

      Now this is virtually always true with accidental copying errors; but many other genome changes could be classified as mutations – horizontal gene transfer, transposition, Natural Genetic Engineering; and those transformations are executed by the organism for the purpose of adapting and are often beneficial. My book “Evolution 2.0” describes this in detail.

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *