Once you venture out from “the world according to Richard Dawkins,” don’t be surprised if you find some refreshing diversity among mainstream biologists. Within the context of a panel discussion, biologist Craig Venter disagreed with the concept of “common dissent,” the very foundation-piece of evolution. About this, William Dembski comments:
• Origin-of-life researchers such as Ford Doolittle and Carl Woese have questioned for some time whether there even is a tree of life [common dissent]. Venter is now following in their train. What’s significant is not so much whether Venter is right (I think he is), but what his dissent from Darwinian orthodoxy suggests about the disarray in the study of biological origins. If common descent is up for grabs, what isn’t?
In the video, Richard Dawkins was flabbergasted:
• The DNA code is all but identical [among all living things]. Doesn’t this mean that they are all related? (My rough quote from the video.)
Interestingly, no one jumped to Dawkins’ defense of this necessary pillar of Darwinism.
Common Descent is fairly secure - descent from a single initial population (though is is possible there was a number of initial populations of replicating molecules).
ReplyDeleteThe tree of life has become more complicated as evidence comes in for horizontal gene transfer having occurred among "higher" organisms. HGT is common in bacteria, and occurs in plants, but it is being found on other life forms, which is complicating the so called "tree of life", adding more connections.
This isn't particularly controversial, nor is it a "threat" to the theory of evolution, nor is it supporting evidence for ID.
Ps. To address the final question from your Dembski quote:
ReplyDeleteIf common descent is up for grabs, what isn’t?
Everything is up for grabs - this is science.
Unfortunately for Dembski and his ilk, to claim something you need to produce positive evidence "in favour" of your hypothesis, and not just point out known gaps in knowledge.