And was the earlier researcher, also a "Darwin", related?
Yes, Erasmus Darwin was Charles' grandfather.
Yes Diogenesister that's right.
Like many vestigial features it has been adapted to a new function. It spends a few days - or might be weeks I can't remember - dealing with circulation while the embryo develops.
Hi Cofty this is very interesting science indeed. I do learn from your post.
That being said.... I don't like the statement "Evolution is a Fact" No one can prove that statement. Now Evolution might be the best way to explain all the science and observations that biologist make. It also seems to work in a "predictive" sense. So it is very useful.
Maybe a statement such as "Evolution is good strong science with lost of supporting evidence" would be much more accurate.
Scientists should be curious and open minded. Everything should be questioned.
I don't like the statement "Evolution is a Fact" No one can prove that statement... Scientists should be curious and open minded. Everything should be questioned. - LS
Scientists are curious and open minded. They spend every day trying to falsify things. The thing about evolution is that for the last 150 years it has defied every attempt. The evidence for evolution is proven beyond all reasonable doubt. Just as it is a fact that the earth is not flat it is also a fact that every living thing evolved from a common ancestor over millions of years.
Here is a quote from the National Academy of Sciences that explains it well..
In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.
Isn't that Lamarckism? - Old Hippy
I just noticed this post, sorry for not answering it sooner.
The short answer is no. Lamarck's idea was that acquired characteristics are passed on to future generations. For example a giraffe that keeps stretching to reach the fruit will have a baby with a longer neck. This isn't how evolution works. Darwin's theory of natural selection showed how change actually occurs.
What is being described here is a loss of a function. If changes in environment mean that there is no longer a selective pressure to maintain a function then it can be lost with impunity.
The discovery of epigenetics has put Lamarck back in the spotlight in the popular press. Epigenetics is about how particular genes can be switched off by environmental factors. The underlying DNA is unaffected however and any changes seem to be limited to a few generations at most. There is a lot still to be discovered in this field.
"Human Egg Yolk"...
...tastes like chicken?