From: Michael Roberts (michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk)
Date: Tue Oct 14 2003 - 11:45:57 EDT
Precisely. What does this say about Wells and DI and also ID. I think Wells has more Ph Ds than most of us so he cannot hide behind incompetence. If he is not incompetent then what is he?
How does this compare withn Haeckel on embryology?
I think this is a very fair question to ask.
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: Keith Miller
To: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: Phillip Johnson (and Methodological Naturalism)
I guess it was this thread where you asserted that criticisms of the "Icons" were offtrack. What is your take of Jerry Coyne's review written in Nature 1998 where he states:
Finally, the results of Kettlewellís behavioural
experiments were not replicated in
later studies: moths have no tendency to
choose matching backgrounds. Majerus
finds many other flaws in the work, but they
are too numerous to list here. I unearthed
additional problems when, embarrassed
at having taught the standard Biston story
for years, I read Kettlewellís papers for the
first time.
Wells' critique of the work on evolutionary change in the peppered moth was substantially drawn from the work of Michael Majerus (Melanism: Evolution in Action" by Michael E.N. Majerus: Oxford University Press,1998).
Wells quotes the following sentence from Majerus' book: "The findings of these scientists show that the precised description of the basic peppered moth story is wrong, inaccurate, or incomplete, with respect to most of the story's component parts."
However, the next sentence reads: "When details of the genetics, behaviour, and ecology of this moth are taken into account, the resulting story is one of greater complexity, and in many ways greater interest, than the simple story that is usually related."
Furthermore, a couple sentences later Majerus states: "First, it is important to emphasize that, in my view, the huge wealth of additional data obtained since Kettlewell's initial predation papers (Kettlewell 1955a, 1956), does not undermine the basic qualitative deductions from that work. Differential bird predation of the typica and carbonaria forms, in habitats affected by industrial pollution to different degrees, is the primary influence on the evolution of melanism in the peppered moth."
Jerry Coyne in a letter to a newspaper or journal says that Wells also misrepresented him. I have been trying to trace that letter down, but have not yet found it. I will post it when I find it.
Keith
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Oct 14 2003 - 12:33:45 EDT