READER COMMENTS

THESE MEN MAY BE ABOUT TO ALTER HOW WE THINK ABOUT...

THERE ARE TWO alternatives to natural selection. Unnatural selection and the absence of selection.

The actions and functions of genetic material is nowhere near well understood. Recently a significant percentage of extant DNA sequences were described as "junk" DNA. Even more recently, a concept has come to flourish that there is indeed biological purpose and function in what was believed to be redundant or useless segments.

That there are mechanisms of inheritance that do not involve chromosomal DNA has been well known for some time. That organisms can "direct" the rate and possibly the direction of their evolutionary mutations is a new and interesting hypothesis. But the mechanism for this is it undoubtedly of a Darwinian nature, in that the changes in the rate of mutation and evolution are the result of natural selection pressures on the organism.

That Darwin's theory of evolution was pre-DNA, and did not encompass all future knowledge does not mean that it is invalid or about to be rocked from its foundations. Darwin's theory has encompassed chromosomal DNA, non-nuclear inheritance and an enormous number of other discoveries. In the end they have all strengthened the philosophical and most importantly the scientific basis of Darwin's theories.

Science news is not science knowledge. Every year there are hundreds of people who have claim to have succeeded in circumventing the Second Law of thermodynamics. Every year there is news that the Second Law has been violated. Every year such stories are eventually determined to be fraud, or they fade away in the ignominy of fatal error. Such stories may be "news", but they are not scientific knowledge. - m

THIS SEEMS much like the research I've started on. Many more intersecting patterns than just one force is driving natural selection and speciation. Trying to incorporate all the variables into one unified theory would be the real trouble.

SUSAN MAZUR is not at all descriptive or explanatory in explaining her claim that Dawkins "admits" to being guilty of viewing Darwinism as religion. Indeed, her own article includes the following quote from Dawkins:

"I gather that it's an attack on the gene-centered view of evolution and a substitution of the theory of form."

The theory of form I presume dates back to D'Arcy Thompson , who was a distinguished Scottish zoologist who wrote a book called On Growth and Form and who purported to be anti-Darwinian. In fact, he never really talked about the real problems that Darwinism solves, which is the problem of adaptation.

Now D'Arcy Thompson and other people who stress the word form emphasize the laws of physics. Physical principles alone as on their own adequate to explain the form of organisms. So for example, D'Arcy Thompson would look at the way a rubber tube would get reshaped when crushed and he would find analogies to that in living organisms.

I see a lot of value in that kind of approach. It is something we can't as biologists afford to neglect. However, it absolutely neglects the question where does the illusion of design come from? Where do animals and plants get this powerful impression that they have been brilliantly designed for a purpose? Where does that come from?

That does not come from the laws of physics on their own. That cannot come from anything that has so far been suggested by anybody other than natural selection. So I don't see any conflict at all between the theory of natural selection -- the gene-centered theory of natural selection, I should say -- and the theory of form. We need both. We need both. And it is disingenuous to present the one as antagonistic to the other."

I HAVE NO PROBLEM with these men challenging natural selection (science is all about inquiry and intellectual rigor). I just hope they don't encourage the fundies.

LATEST POLL FROM ZOGBY SHOW NADER A BIG FACTOR

DESPITE HIS DENIALS, Nader elected Bush in 2000. Only a delusional egomaniac would do it again for McCain in 2008, while claiming that he wasn't sabotaging the Democratic Party.

YOU ARE 100% WRONG about 2000. Search The Progressive Review for Sam's many excellent articles analyzing that election in great detail. The result this time could be very different, but in 2000 Nader took more votes from Bush than from Gore and most of his votes came from those who would otherwise not have voted at all.

SURE, NADER DREW more than 2.8 million votes, including more than 97,000 in Florida, but he was not a factor in the outcome an election that was decided by a few hundred votes. Denying his disastrous impact only enables its repetition.

THE FLAW IN YOUR LOGIC is the absurd implication that all of those Nader voters would have voted for Gore if Nader had not been running. This is just plain wrong. Most would not have voted at all, and enough others would have voted for Bush that the net result would have been a clear win for him. When you start from faulty assumptions, you end up with faulty conclusions.

HERE'S WHAT JOHN ZOGBY says about 2000: "Nader entered the race recently, charging that there is little difference between the Republican and Democratic parties and their presidential candidates. Using the same argument eight years ago, his presence on the ballot in Florida may well have tipped the presidential election away from Democrat Al Gore and in favor of George W. Bush." Here's what he says about 2008:

"Independent candidate Ralph Nader wins 5%, taking more support from Democrats." Nader's impact as a spoiler has been disastrous. Denying it, so he can do it again, is worse.

DEMOCRATS hate the notion of anyone challenging the two party system, and, hence, the urban myth that Nader cost the Democrats the 2000 election. A myth that they quickly jettison when trying to gin up hostility towards Republicans and Christian fundamentalists, when they then call that Bush stole the 2000 election.

Which is it? Nader got 97,000 votes in Florida, but Bush got about 500,000 Democratic ones, something that you rarely, if ever, hear Democratic partisans admit.

Anyway, another real problem with Nader is that he exposes the extent to which liberals and establishment Democrats sold out the people that they demand continue to vote for Democratic candidates.

Basically, I find the whole argument tiresome. Nader says some of the right things, but it would be better if Matt Gonzalez was at the top of the ticket instead of him. To vote for Nader, you have to believe that participating in this corrupt process has some potential to improve things, instead of legitimizing it, as I think it does.

A national boycott, where everyone goes to the polls and spoils their ballots in the Presidential race by writing in, say, Zippy the Pinhead or Jose Sarria or Fred Korematsu, is, in my view, a better idea. - Richard

2000 and 2008 are very different animals. Yes, Nader may very well throw the election to McCain this time. I'm not arguing with that at all. That was not the case in 2000, no matter how "comforting" you may find the idea. (By comforting, I mean that had Gore campaigned in Tennessee or encouraged general insurrection after the Supreme Court illegally appointed Bush we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Folks like you just can't face the fact that all the blame for Bush being in office rests squarely on Gore.

JEFFERSON AND PAINE SHOVED ASIDE FOR CONSERVATIVE ADAM

ANYONE WHO WANTS to get an in-depth look at 'freedom lover' John Adams should read "American Aurora" by Richard M. Rosenfeld. It give an excellent recounting of Adams attempts to suppress, shut down and jail the publisher of the newspaper 'American Aurora' (said publisher being one of the grandsons of Benjamin Franklin) that dared to challenge Adams' prosecutions of the Alien and Sedition Acts. Adams is shown in this book to be precisely the type of tyrant-in-utero that Jefferson tried to warn the newly created republic against.

US AIR FORCE ADOPTS NAZI MOTTO

TALK ABOUT HYPERSENSITIVITY! The Nazi's (Hitler specifically) is credited with the creation of Volkswagon... Does that mean we should never by one? Would you like to have a Porsche? Well it was Porsche whom Hitler tasked with creating the "Peoples Car" (Volkswagon). I'm Jewish, and not even slightly offended. It's a good slogan. If we start vilifying otherwise harmless phrases based upon who spoke them in the past, then we truly still are victims.

FORGET ABOUT SPITZER; LET'S GET BACK TO THE REAL NEWS

THE PAIR IN THE ABOVE PHOTO look as if they'd melt if left near a direct heat source. When I look at the pathetic, plastic phonies the male gender are willing to make fools of themselves over (not to mention their wives, kids, etc.) it frankly makes me both happy and relieved to be a gay woman. Being the wife of one of these clowns is, at least, one worry or humiliation I'll never have to face.

A LETTER TO OKLAHOMA STATE REPRESENTATIVE. SALLY K...

GIVEN THE STATE OF the national economy, military and legal system, it would appear that the majority of elected politicians do more damage to our nation than terrorists

THE FISCAL CRISIS: AMERICANS HAVE BEEN CONNED

WHAT AN UTTER LOT OF CRAP. The subprime crisis was caused almost entirely by the Fed raising rates and throwing people out of work. Secondarily the rising Fed rates caused adjustable mortgage rates to rise.

Anybody who thinks it was a speculative bubble has to explain why Americans evolved such speculativity in the past three years where they didn't have it before. There are a lot of problems with our economy and the Fed. As long as the government keeps creating these problems, the government should be held responsible for bailing people out. It would be easier to stop creating the problems.

DAMN FINE ARTICLE. The US has been suffering from increasing levels of financial fraud since the deregulation fad started under Reagan. The current scandal under George Bush makes the Savings and Loan Crisis the late 80's and 90's look a practice run, especially considering brother Neal Bush's involvement in the failed Silverado Savings and Loan. The Bush crime family has been fleecing the USA for decades. The impoverishment of the US's working class is paved under the "free market" banner.

BRITAIN OUTDOES ORWELL AGAIN

THEY SHOULD BE SURE to register anyone who shows interest in being a businessman or a politician. Those are the largest criminal classes these days.

THESE SAME DNA markers would indicate a promising career in law enforcement. Looking back, the police state did indeed arrive about 1984, notwithstanding naive warnings like "step towards a 'police state'", by those who can't recognize it's been here for a while.

OBAMA ON ETHNICITY

READING THE TEXT of the speech, I noticed two areas that seem to distinguish Obama from the other two "electables": 1) He stated that corporations are ruining the country, 2) He stated that the war in Iraq is a terrible mistake. I see two ways of looking at that: 1) His donors know that this is the kind of bullshit he needs to spout in order to win but that he won't actually pursue these ideas once in office, 2) His donors, having heard this, will immediately start helping Hillary. - FoE

TOO BAD REVEREND WRIGHT isn't a candidate: at least he speaks the uncomfortable truths about the USA, rather than steering us right back into the mythology of American exceptionalism that Obama is exploiting. Yet Obama's rhetorical flag-waving seems to work in a nation steeped in denial, unable to face its own ugliness in the mirror.

HOMELAND SECURITY'S FIVE YEARS OF SCREW UPS

AS FAR AS THE GOVERNMENT is concerned, the only thing that was bungled about the handling of hurricane Katrina was the public relations. For the DHS, it was a tremendous success in imposing martial law, politician cronies profiting from disaster capitalism, demonizing the lower classes and minorities, and cleansing New Orleans of the same. In other words, a mere practice run for the dictatorship to follow the next "terror attack" that Dubya keeps threatening the nation with. Your government can't protect you, but it can get you killed.

MUSICIANS SUING RECORD PRODUCERS

THERE HAS LONG BEEN TALK, as well as specific statements by a variety of entertainment artists, that they often do not receive some or any of the royalty payments due them. This includes some extremely well known artists as well as lesser knowns. There are also claims that industry specific contracts and contract law makes it difficult to impossible for any mere mortal to either audit or litigate such matters.

MCCAIN THE WARMONGER

DESPITE YOUR EXTREME RHETORICAL paint job on on your little canvas, McCain is right. And you're an idiot. I am curious, do you have any opinions of your own or do you just repeat what political hacks are saying in real life? Good luck, you need it and a life!

BUSH SAYS FIGHTING IN AFGHANISTAN WOULD BE ROMANTIC

ACTUALLY, I DIDN'T KNOW he was employed here. I don't count fucking up for eight years as real employment. Just sort of a hobby, something that kept him out of George and Babs' hair for all those years.

HOW TO IMPROVE THE ECONOMY: LEGALIZE POT

AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN anytime soon. Potheads are still fair game for the PC crowd. The leftists who made it through grad school don't think the rest of us can handle our drugs. And the right wingers are honest in that they just don't like brown or poor people. Besides, the drug war has less to do with drugs than it does class war and social control. That's why sensible arguments fall on deaf ears. Nice thought, though.

FAR MORE THAN A SUBPRIME PROBLEM

THE FORECLOSURES IN HIGHER MARKETS contradicts most of the other stuff you have posted on this subject. It's okay to post inconsistent stuff that's fine. But most of the liberal solutions I have read want the government to regulate the banks so they wouldn't make these subprime loans. This article implies that the problem is beyond the banks.